Seeing as there is shorthand available to use when asking for any type
of interrupt, or any type of message signalled interrupt, leverage it.
Signed-off-by: Piotr Stankiewicz <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
---
drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c | 3 +--
drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c | 3 +--
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
index fd76aa672e02..d14997f9cbf9 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
@@ -271,8 +271,7 @@ static void gli_pcie_enable_msi(struct sdhci_pci_slot *slot)
{
int ret;
- ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(slot->chip->pdev, 1, 1,
- PCI_IRQ_MSI | PCI_IRQ_MSIX);
+ ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(slot->chip->pdev, 1, 1, PCI_IRQ_MSI_TYPES);
if (ret < 0) {
pr_warn("%s: enable PCI MSI failed, error=%d\n",
mmc_hostname(slot->host->mmc), ret);
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
index fa8105087d68..498c51207bfb 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
@@ -470,8 +470,7 @@ static void sdhci_pci_o2_enable_msi(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip,
return;
}
- ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(chip->pdev, 1, 1,
- PCI_IRQ_MSI | PCI_IRQ_MSIX);
+ ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(chip->pdev, 1, 1, PCI_IRQ_MSI_TYPES);
if (ret < 0) {
pr_err("%s: enable PCI MSI failed, err=%d\n",
mmc_hostname(host->mmc), ret);
--
2.17.2
On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 11:21, Piotr Stankiewicz
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Seeing as there is shorthand available to use when asking for any type
> of interrupt, or any type of message signalled interrupt, leverage it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Piotr Stankiewicz <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Ulf Hansson <[email protected]>
Kind regards
Uffe
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c | 3 +--
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c | 3 +--
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> index fd76aa672e02..d14997f9cbf9 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> @@ -271,8 +271,7 @@ static void gli_pcie_enable_msi(struct sdhci_pci_slot *slot)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(slot->chip->pdev, 1, 1,
> - PCI_IRQ_MSI | PCI_IRQ_MSIX);
> + ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(slot->chip->pdev, 1, 1, PCI_IRQ_MSI_TYPES);
> if (ret < 0) {
> pr_warn("%s: enable PCI MSI failed, error=%d\n",
> mmc_hostname(slot->host->mmc), ret);
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
> index fa8105087d68..498c51207bfb 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
> @@ -470,8 +470,7 @@ static void sdhci_pci_o2_enable_msi(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip,
> return;
> }
>
> - ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(chip->pdev, 1, 1,
> - PCI_IRQ_MSI | PCI_IRQ_MSIX);
> + ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(chip->pdev, 1, 1, PCI_IRQ_MSI_TYPES);
> if (ret < 0) {
> pr_err("%s: enable PCI MSI failed, err=%d\n",
> mmc_hostname(host->mmc), ret);
> --
> 2.17.2
>
On 2/06/20 12:20 pm, Piotr Stankiewicz wrote:
> Seeing as there is shorthand available to use when asking for any type
> of interrupt, or any type of message signalled interrupt, leverage it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Piotr Stankiewicz <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c | 3 +--
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c | 3 +--
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> index fd76aa672e02..d14997f9cbf9 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-gli.c
> @@ -271,8 +271,7 @@ static void gli_pcie_enable_msi(struct sdhci_pci_slot *slot)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(slot->chip->pdev, 1, 1,
> - PCI_IRQ_MSI | PCI_IRQ_MSIX);
> + ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(slot->chip->pdev, 1, 1, PCI_IRQ_MSI_TYPES);
> if (ret < 0) {
> pr_warn("%s: enable PCI MSI failed, error=%d\n",
> mmc_hostname(slot->host->mmc), ret);
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
> index fa8105087d68..498c51207bfb 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pci-o2micro.c
> @@ -470,8 +470,7 @@ static void sdhci_pci_o2_enable_msi(struct sdhci_pci_chip *chip,
> return;
> }
>
> - ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(chip->pdev, 1, 1,
> - PCI_IRQ_MSI | PCI_IRQ_MSIX);
> + ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(chip->pdev, 1, 1, PCI_IRQ_MSI_TYPES);
> if (ret < 0) {
> pr_err("%s: enable PCI MSI failed, err=%d\n",
> mmc_hostname(host->mmc), ret);
>
On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 11:20:59AM +0200, Piotr Stankiewicz wrote:
> Seeing as there is shorthand available to use when asking for any type
> of interrupt, or any type of message signalled interrupt, leverage it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Piotr Stankiewicz <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
So this crap now shows up piecemail on various lists? Indepent of that
it seems like a bad idea to start with, bombing people with patches that
apparently depend on something you did first but they are not Cced on
is just an amazingly bad idea. Don't do that ever.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 7:27 AM
> To: Stankiewicz, Piotr <[email protected]>
> Cc: Hunter, Adrian <[email protected]>; Ulf Hansson
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; linux-
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/15] mmc: sdhci: use PCI_IRQ_MSI_TYPES where
> appropriate
>
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2020 at 11:20:59AM +0200, Piotr Stankiewicz wrote:
> > Seeing as there is shorthand available to use when asking for any type
> > of interrupt, or any type of message signalled interrupt, leverage it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Piotr Stankiewicz <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
>
> So this crap now shows up piecemail on various lists? Indepent of that it seems
> like a bad idea to start with, bombing people with patches that apparently
> depend on something you did first but they are not Cced on is just an amazingly
> bad idea. Don't do that ever.
I've sent the cover letter for the series to everyone question, to avoid spamming
people with irrelevant patches, but so that they can find the rest if necessary.
What would be a preferable thing to do?