From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pbonzini@redhat.com (Paolo Bonzini) Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 08:52:10 +0200 Subject: [RFC 12/17] irq: bypass: Extend skeleton for ARM forwarding control In-Reply-To: References: <1435843047-6327-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <1435843047-6327-13-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> Message-ID: <5596311A.3010703@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/07/2015 04:43, Wu, Feng wrote: > > struct irq_bypass_consumer { > struct list_head node; > void *token; > + unsigned irq; /*got from producer when registered*/ > void (*add_producer)(struct irq_bypass_producer *, > struct irq_bypass_consumer *); > void (*del_producer)(struct irq_bypass_producer *, > struct irq_bypass_consumer *); > + void (*update)(struct irq_bypass_consumer *); > }; > > 'update' is used to update the IRTE, while irq is initialized when > registered, which is used to find the right IRTE. Feel free to add "update" in your PI patches. I am not sure if "irq" belongs here or in the containing struct. You can play with both and submit the version that looks better to you. Paolo