On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 01:42:57PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 11:17:23AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > I don't care whether the "if (irq_remap_broken)" test is in
> > irq_remapping.c or intel_irq_remapping.c. The quirk itself, where we
> > actually look at config space, is clearly Intel-specific, but there
> > could easily be similar AMD quirks that could also set
> > irq_remap_broken. In that case, it would make sense to have the test
> > in the common code.
> >
> I've moved it to intel specific code for the time being, since it currently is
> intel specific, its an easy move to put it in a common location if other
> vendors
> have a need for it.
>
> I'm currently waiting on aproval to make the bz public, so that its inclusion
> in
> the changelog is more than just an irritation when following the link results
> in
> a 403 error. As soon as thats square, I'll post this again, CC-ing Jeorg and
> Konrad.
Thanks Neil. As long as this quirk is intel specific it should be in
the intel-code.
Joerg
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
