On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 01:23:45PM -0700, Kevin D. Kissell wrote: > I'm still on the mailing list, and had seen this going by. I'm not sure > where that second .flags declaration got added. Way, way back when I > was pretty much the only maintainer of the file, irq_ipi.flags was > explicitly initialized to IRQF_DISABLED by an actual assignment > statement in setp_cross_vpe_interrupts(), and the per-CPUness was > handled by an "irq_desc[cpu_ipi_irq].status |= IRQ_PER_CPU". My guess > is that first someone (maybe me) migrated the IRQF_DISABLED assignment > into the declaration of the struct, and that later someone found the > IRQ_PER_CPU thing bogus or deprecated and converted it into a second > .flags line in the struct declaration, missing the fact that there was > already one there. > > In any case, I'm willing to sign off on Julia's patch. It's certainly > more important that the IRQ be PER_CPU than initially DISABLED, but > during the time when SMTC was seeing its heaviest testing at MIPS, both > attributes were true. I've reverted my patch and merged Julia's original patch with an extra comment added. Thanks Julia, Ralf -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
