From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Borkmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] net-next: mediatek: IRQ cleanups, fixes and grouping Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:51:34 +0200 Message-ID: <576276A6.6040904@iogearbox.net> References: <1466002730-58476-1-git-send-email-john@phrozen.org> <20160615.222050.2210130284846212716.davem@davemloft.net> <5dbb935d-2d9a-48fe-79c7-8e8f57b27678@phrozen.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, keyhaede@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nbd@nbd.name To: John Crispin , David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5dbb935d-2d9a-48fe-79c7-8e8f57b27678@phrozen.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 06/16/2016 11:44 AM, John Crispin wrote: > On 16/06/2016 07:20, David Miller wrote: >> From: John Crispin >> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 16:58:46 +0200 >> >>> This series contains 2 small code cleanups that are leftovers from the >>> MIPS support. There is also a small fix that adds proper locking to the >>> code accessing the IRQ registers. Without this fix we saw deadlocks caused >>> by the last patch of the series, which adds IRQ grouping. The grouping >>> feature allows us to use different IRQs for TX and RX. By doing so we can >>> use affinity to let the SoC handle the IRQs on different cores. >> >> This patch series doesn't apply cleanly to the net-next tree, I get rejects >> on patch #4. > > it depends on the series with the 11 fixes that i sent last week which > is however in the net tree and not the next tree (i also still had the > DQL hack in my tree). if i resend this at the start of the next rc1 > would you merge it into the net tree so that it becomes part of v4.8 ? Well, it would rather require a merge of -net into -net-next then. But that would be useful indeed. Cheers, Daniel