On 16.10.23 09:28, Juergen Gross wrote:
Hello Juergen
> Instead of the IRQ number user the struct irq_info pointer as parameter
> in the internal pirq related functions. This allows to drop some calls
> of info_for_irq().
>
> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgr...@suse.com>
Looks good, so
Reviewed-by: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshche...@epam.com>
Just one NIT below ...
[snip]
>
> -static void pirq_query_unmask(int irq)
> +static void pirq_query_unmask(struct irq_info *info)
> {
> struct physdev_irq_status_query irq_status;
> - struct irq_info *info = info_for_irq(irq);
>
> BUG_ON(info->type != IRQT_PIRQ);
>
> - irq_status.irq = pirq_from_irq(irq);
> + irq_status.irq = info->u.pirq.pirq;
... what is the reason to open-code pirq_from_irq() here?
For example, __startup_pirq() continues to use helper in almost the same
situation ...
[snip]
>
> -static unsigned int __startup_pirq(unsigned int irq)
> +static unsigned int __startup_pirq(struct irq_info *info)
> {
> struct evtchn_bind_pirq bind_pirq;
> - struct irq_info *info = info_for_irq(irq);
> - evtchn_port_t evtchn = evtchn_from_irq(irq);
> + evtchn_port_t evtchn = info->evtchn;
> int rc;
>
> BUG_ON(info->type != IRQT_PIRQ);
> @@ -851,20 +868,20 @@ static unsigned int __startup_pirq(unsigned int irq)
> if (VALID_EVTCHN(evtchn))
> goto out;
>
> - bind_pirq.pirq = pirq_from_irq(irq);
> + bind_pirq.pirq = pirq_from_irq(info);
... here
[snip]
