From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] smsc911x: add irq_flags in smsc911x_platform_config. Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 10:05:50 +0000 Message-ID: <20090114100550.GA22976@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1231916280-7391-1-git-send-email-stanley.miao@windriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Stanley.Miao" , David Miller , linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Steve.Glendinning@smsc.com Return-path: Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.218]:48507 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754648AbZANKGL (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Jan 2009 05:06:11 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 08:54:36AM +0000, Steve.Glendinning@smsc.com wrote: > > When calling request IRQ it is desirable to allow platforms > > to specific flags for the call to request_irq. Adding irq_flags > > to smsc911x_platform_config allows these flags to be passed. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stanley.Miao > > Acked-by: Steve Glendinning > > Thanks Stanley. > > I have two more arm platform smsc911x conversion patches (realview and > pcm037) which I'll post for review shortly. Both also depend on this > irq_flags change, as they register their interrupts shared. David: would > it make sense to put this driver patch into the arm tree? Does this really make sense? Normally, the interrupt level/edge stuff is passed through the resource structure. I can't really comment because it seems that there's no way to work out what patch you're acking. I can't find it in the last 6 months of email, and there's no attributation for your quoted reply to hint at when the original message was sent.