On Sun, 2013-11-10 at 21:17 +0100, Michal Nazarewicz wrote:
> inta is checked to be zero in a IRQ_NONE branch so afterwards it
> cannot be zero as it is never modified.
no signed-off-by
> @@ -1150,7 +1149,14 @@ static irqreturn_t iwl_pcie_isr(int irq, void *data)
> * or due to sporadic interrupts thrown from our NIC. */
> if (!inta) {
> IWL_DEBUG_ISR(trans, "Ignore interrupt, inta == 0\n");
> - goto none;
> + /* re-enable interrupts here since we don't have anything to
> + * service. only Re-enable if disabled by irq and no
> + * schedules tasklet.
> + */
> + if (test_bit(STATUS_INT_ENABLED, &trans_pcie->status) &&
> + !trans_pcie->inta)
> + iwl_enable_interrupts(trans);
> + return IRQ_NONE;
I don't really think duplicating this is really an improvement?
johannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
