On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 12:04:35AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> On 26.03.2021 22:26, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > [+cc Randy, Andrew (though I'm sure you have zero interest in this
> > ancient question :))]
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >> pci_set_mwi()
On 26.03.2021 22:26, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc Randy, Andrew (though I'm sure you have zero interest in this
> ancient question :))]
>
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that the
>> former one is dec
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:42:46PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 04:26:55PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > [+cc Randy, Andrew (though I'm sure you have zero interest in this
> > ancient question :))]
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 04:26:55PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc Randy, Andrew (though I'm sure you have zero interest in this
> ancient question :))]
>
> On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> > pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that th
[+cc Randy, Andrew (though I'm sure you have zero interest in this
ancient question :))]
On Wed, Dec 09, 2020 at 09:31:21AM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that the
> former one is declared as __must_check. However also some callers of
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 12:59 PM Andy Shevchenko
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 10:35 AM Heiner Kallweit wrote:
...
> > -int pci_try_set_mwi(struct pci_dev *dev)
> > -{
>
> > -#ifdef PCI_DISABLE_MWI
> > - return 0;
> > -#else
> > - return pci_set_mwi(dev);
> > -#endif
>
> This seems
On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 10:35 AM Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that the
> former one is declared as __must_check. However also some callers of
However also -> However
> pci_set_mwi() have a comment that it's an optional feature. I don't
> t
On Wed, 09 Dec 2020, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that the
> former one is declared as __must_check. However also some callers of
> pci_set_mwi() have a comment that it's an optional feature. I don't
> think there's much sense in this separ
On 20-12-09 09:31:21, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> drivers/usb/chipidea/ci_hdrc_pci.c| 2 +-
For chipidea changes:
Acked-by: Peter Chen
Peter
> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/amd5536udc_pci.c | 2 +-
> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/net2280.c | 2 +-
> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/pc
On 09-12-20, 09:31, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that the
> former one is declared as __must_check. However also some callers of
> pci_set_mwi() have a comment that it's an optional feature. I don't
> think there's much sense in this separat
Heiner Kallweit writes:
> pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that the
> former one is declared as __must_check. However also some callers of
> pci_set_mwi() have a comment that it's an optional feature. I don't
> think there's much sense in this separation and the use o
pci_set_mwi() and pci_try_set_mwi() do exactly the same, just that the
former one is declared as __must_check. However also some callers of
pci_set_mwi() have a comment that it's an optional feature. I don't
think there's much sense in this separation and the use of
__must_check. Therefore remove p
12 matches
Mail list logo
