If you already have a pointer to a struct irq_data , it's more efficient
to use irq_data_get_irq_handler_data().
irq_get_handler_data() has to look up the struct irq_desc pointer again,
which was already passed to the chain handler.
Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@linux-m68k.org>
---
Completely untested, not even compile-tested.
If this is correct, there are probably more of these?
arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.c
index 92e7833..9b92c82 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_msi.c
@@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static void fsl_msi_cascade(unsigned int irq, struct
irq_desc *desc)
u32 have_shift = 0;
struct fsl_msi_cascade_data *cascade_data;
- cascade_data = irq_get_handler_data(irq);
+ cascade_data = irq_data_get_irq_handler_data(idata);
msi_data = cascade_data->msi_data;
raw_spin_lock(&desc->lock);
--
1.7.0.4
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
