On Wed, 1 Jun 2011, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > 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);
cascade_data = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc); Might compile and work :) _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
