Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Feb 2011 11:20:45 -0500 | From | Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <> | Subject | Re: [patch 0/4] XEN: Interrupt cleanups |
| |
On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 04:39:58PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 8 Feb 2011, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 14:55 +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > So, with the fixes to 2/4 (irq_move_irq think from yesterday) and 4/4 > > > > (below), the entire series is: > > > > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com> > > > > > > Cool. So what's the best way to proceed ? That code is not yet in > > > linus tree, right ? > > > > Correct. > > > > > So I guess the best way is that I add the core changes to a rc-4 based > > > branch and you can pull it in and apply the whole xen stuff to your > > > own tree. > > > > My existing cleanup patches are in Konrad's tree (which is in linux-next > > etc) so that probably makes most sense as a home for this series. So > > unless Konrad has any objections I think it makes sense to pull your > > core changes into that branch and then apply your Xen bits on top.
Ok. Pulled in these patches and stuck Ack-ed by Ian on them. > > > > Konrad's branch with my stuff is: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/konrad/xen.git stable/irq.rework > > > > Konrad, this thread starts at <20110205200108.921707839@linutronix.de> > > == http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1096437 > > > > > I base my pending patches on top of that so it wont be any problem > > > when merging the stuff together in next or linus later. > > > > I don't think there will be much trouble with overlap between these and > > any Xen events.c changes for the next merge window but what you suggest > > should remove the risk. > > Yes, and please talk to me next time before you hack around in the > guts of the interrupt code. I noticed just because I was skimming > -next, and that really conflicts with major cleanups I'm doing. If > there is a shortcoming in the generic code, then let me know.
<scratches his head> The rework was in Xen code not in generic, and the only generic changes that are in there .. are your code?
This is what I've in the stable/irq.rework and also in the linux-next branch. Please tell me if I messed up.
Ian Campbell (7): xen: handled remapped IRQs when enabling a pcifront PCI device. xen:events: move find_unbound_irq inside CONFIG_PCI_MSI xen: events: add xen_allocate_irq_{dynamic, gsi} and xen_free_irq xen: events: allocate GSIs and dynamic IRQs from separate IRQ ranges. xen: events: do not free legacy IRQs xen: Fix compile error introduced by "switch to new irq_chip functions" xen/timer: Missing IRQF_NO_SUSPEND in timer code broke suspend.
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk (2): xen/irq: Cleanup the find_unbound_irq xen/irq: Don't fall over when nr_irqs_gsi > nr_irqs.
Thomas Gleixner (3): xen: Remove stale irq_chip.end xen: Switch to new irq_chip functions genirq: Add IRQF_FORCE_RESUME
> > Core change is in > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git irq/for-xen
<nods> Pulled that in my branch. > > Thanks, > > tglx > -- > 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/
| |