Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@metux.net>
To:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
        jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
        will@kernel.org, msalter@redhat.com, jacquiot.aurelien@gmail.com,
        gerg@linux-m68k.org, geert@linux-m68k.org,
        tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com,
        deller@gmx.de, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org,
        ysato@users.sourceforge.jp, dalias@libc.org, davem@davemloft.net,
        tglx@linutronix.de, bp@alien8.de, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com,
        linus.walleij@linaro.org, bgolaszewski@baylibre.com,
        maz@kernel.org, tony@atomide.com, arnd@arndb.de,
        linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x.org,
        linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 05/23] arch: ia64: drop misleading warning on spurious IRQ
Date:   Fri, 18 Dec 2020 15:31:04 +0100
Message-Id: <20201218143122.19459-6-info@metux.net>
In-Reply-To: <20201218143122.19459-1-info@metux.net>
References: <20201218143122.19459-1-info@metux.net>
Precedence: bulk

The warning in ack_bad_irq() is misleading in several ways:
* the term "vector" isn't quite correct
* the printing format isn't consistent across the archs: some print decimal,
  some hex, some hex w/o "0x" prefix.
* the printed linux irq isn't meaningful in all cases - we actually would
  want it to print the hw irq.

Since all call sites already print out more detailed and correct information,
we just don't need to duplicate this in each single arch. So just drop it.

Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net>
---
 arch/ia64/include/asm/hardirq.h | 2 +-
 arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c          | 9 ---------
 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/ia64/include/asm/hardirq.h b/arch/ia64/include/asm/hardirq.h
index ccde7c2ba00f..dddaafaf84e0 100644
--- a/arch/ia64/include/asm/hardirq.h
+++ b/arch/ia64/include/asm/hardirq.h
@@ -22,6 +22,6 @@
 
 extern void __iomem *ipi_base_addr;
 
-void ack_bad_irq(unsigned int irq);
+#define ack_bad_irq(irq)
 
 #endif /* _ASM_IA64_HARDIRQ_H */
diff --git a/arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c b/arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c
index ecef17c7c35b..1365c7cf2095 100644
--- a/arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c
+++ b/arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c
@@ -28,15 +28,6 @@
 #include <asm/xtp.h>
 
 /*
- * 'what should we do if we get a hw irq event on an illegal vector'.
- * each architecture has to answer this themselves.
- */
-void ack_bad_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
-	printk(KERN_ERR "Unexpected irq vector 0x%x on CPU %u!\n", irq, smp_processor_id());
-}
-
-/*
  * Interrupt statistics:
  */
 
-- 
2.11.0