From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bjorn Helgaas Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 14:57:59 +0000 Subject: Re: [ACPI] [PATCH] PCI IRQ resource deallocation support [2/3] Message-Id: <200409210857.59457.bjorn.helgaas@hp.com> List-Id: References: <414FEBDB.2050201@soft.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <414FEBDB.2050201@soft.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Kenji Kaneshige , akpm@osdl.org, greg@kroah.com, len.brown@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 21 September 2004 2:52 am, Kenji Kaneshige wrote: > + * This function undoes the effect of one call to acpi_register_gsi(). > + * If this matches the last regstration, any IRQ resources for gsi s/regstration/registration/ (also other occurrences below). > +void > +acpi_pci_irq_disable ( > + struct pci_dev *dev) > +{ > + unsigned char irq_disabled, irq; pci_dev.irq is unsigned int, not unsigned char, so irq_disabled should be unsigned int as well. > + * dev->irq is cleared by BIOS-assigned IRQ set during boot. > + */ > + pci_read_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN, &irq); > + if (irq) > + pci_read_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, &irq); > + dev->irq = irq; Why do we need to fiddle with dev->irq? I think it should just be undefined after acpi_pci_irq_disable().