Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266127AbUI0Fra (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Sep 2004 01:47:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266133AbUI0Fra (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Sep 2004 01:47:30 -0400 Received: from fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp ([192.51.44.36]:55786 "EHLO fgwmail6.fujitsu.co.jp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266127AbUI0FrZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Sep 2004 01:47:25 -0400 Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:49:11 +0900 From: Kenji Kaneshige Subject: Re: [ACPI] [PATCH] Updated patches for PCI IRQ resource deallocation support [2/3] In-reply-to: To: Zwane Mwaikambo Cc: Linux Kernel , long , Andrew Morton , Greg Kroah-Hartmann , Len Brown , tony.luck@intel.com, acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Message-id: <4157A9D7.4090605@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Accept-Language: ja User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ja-JP; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax) References: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1422 Lines: 44 Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: > On Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: > >> Kenji Kaneshige wrote: >> >> > - Changed acpi_pci_irq_disable() to leave 'dev->irq' as it >> > is. Clearing 'dev->irq' by some magic constant >> > (e.g. PCI_UNDEFINED_IRQ) is TBD. >> >> This may not be safe with CONFIG_PCI_MSI, you may want to verify against >> that if you already haven't. >> Thank you for commemts. You are right. If the linux IRQ number is allocated by MSI code, clearing 'dev->irq' would cause a problem. So we need to consider clearing 'dev->irq' carefully. The latest patch doesn't clear 'dev->irq' so far. >> > +acpi_unregister_gsi (unsigned int irq) >> > +{ >> > +} >> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_unregister_gsi); >> >> Why not just make these static inlines in header files? Since you're on >> this, how about making irq_desc and friends dynamic too? > > Sorry, i broke Cc. > I'm not quite sure what you are saying, but my idea is defining acpi_unregister_gsi() as a opposite part of acpi_register_gsi(). Acpi_register_gsi() is defined for each arch (i386, ia64), so acpi_unregister_gsi() is defined for each i386 and ia64 too. Thanks, Kenji Kaneshige - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/