I don't like this 'save' boolean. How about we do it this way:
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 05:38:37PM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote:
> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ static inline __attribute_const__ u32 msi_enabled_mask(u16 control)
> * reliably as devices without an INTx disable bit will then generate a
> * level IRQ which will never be cleared.
> */
> -static void msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> +static void __msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag, int save)
static u32 __msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> {
> u32 mask_bits = desc->masked;
>
> @@ -137,7 +137,19 @@ static void msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
> mask_bits &= ~mask;
> mask_bits |= flag;
> pci_write_config_dword(desc->dev, desc->mask_pos, mask_bits);
> - desc->masked = mask_bits;
> +
> + if (save)
> + desc->masked = mask_bits;
> +}
+ return mask_bits;
}
static void msi_mask_irq(struct msi_desc *desc, u32 mask, u32 flag)
{
desc->masked = __msi_mask_irq(desc, mask, flag);
}
and then we can get rid of msi_mask_irq_nocache -- the caller can
simply call __msi_mask_irq() directly.
The same applies to msix_ of course.
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
