On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 02:00:45PM +0100, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c index bda5a91..8821160 100644 --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c @@ -502,13 +502,17 @@ static void __init gic_init_fiq(struct gic_chip_data *gic, /*
- Fully acknowledge (both ack and eoi) a FIQ-based IPI
*/ -static int gic_handle_fiq_ipi(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long regs,
void *data)+void gic_handle_fiq_ipi(void) { struct gic_chip_data *gic = &gic_data[0];
- void __iomem *cpu_base = gic_data_cpu_base(gic);
- void __iomem *cpu_base; unsigned long irqstat, irqnr;
- if (!gic || !gic->fiq_enable)
return;- cpu_base = gic_data_cpu_base(gic);
- if (WARN_ON(!in_nmi())) return NOTIFY_BAD;
@@ -525,13 +529,6 @@ static int gic_handle_fiq_ipi(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long regs, return NOTIFY_OK; }
-/*
- Notifier to ensure IPI FIQ is acknowledged correctly.
- */
-static struct notifier_block gic_fiq_ipi_notifier = {
- .notifier_call = gic_handle_fiq_ipi,
-}; #else /* CONFIG_FIQ */ static inline void gic_set_group_irq(void __iomem *base, unsigned int hwirq, int group) {} @@ -1250,10 +1247,6 @@ void __init gic_init_bases(unsigned int gic_nr, int irq_start, #ifdef CONFIG_SMP set_smp_cross_call(gic_raise_softirq); register_cpu_notifier(&gic_cpu_notifier); -#ifdef CONFIG_FIQ
if (gic_data_fiq_enable(gic))register_fiq_nmi_notifier(&gic_fiq_ipi_notifier);-#endif #endif set_handle_irq(gic_handle_irq); }
Shouldn't this be merged into some other patch?