On 9 September 2014 16:27, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 9 September 2014 17:25, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: >> For consistency we need to not set do_interrupt in >> the arm_cpu_class_init() function too. (Then we'll >> have it be NULL in all cases, since v7m already >> guards its assignment with an ifdef.) >> > > Would you prefer a single patch that does both? > Or a followup patch?
I think a single patch doing both will be OK. I don't care strongly either way. -- PMM
