From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@wdc.com>
Cc: "palmer@sifive.com" <palmer@sifive.com>,
"alistair23@gmail.com" <alistair23@gmail.com>,
"linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip: plic: Fix priority base offset
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:48:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190320234858.GA5304@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190320223853.1209-1-alistair.francis@wdc.com>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 10:39:52PM +0000, Alistair Francis wrote:
> According to the FU540 and E31 manuals the PLIC source priority
> address starts at an offset of 0x04 and not 0x00. To aviod confusion
> update the address and source offset to match the documentation. This
> causes no difference in functionality.
Well, it starts at 0x00, but the first one is reserved. If you think
that is too confusing I'd rather throw in a comment explaining this
fact rather than making the calculating more complicated.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Alistair Francis <Alistair.Francis@wdc.com>
Cc: "alistair23@gmail.com" <alistair23@gmail.com>,
"linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
"palmer@sifive.com" <palmer@sifive.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip: plic: Fix priority base offset
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 16:48:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190320234858.GA5304@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190320223853.1209-1-alistair.francis@wdc.com>
On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 10:39:52PM +0000, Alistair Francis wrote:
> According to the FU540 and E31 manuals the PLIC source priority
> address starts at an offset of 0x04 and not 0x00. To aviod confusion
> update the address and source offset to match the documentation. This
> causes no difference in functionality.
Well, it starts at 0x00, but the first one is reserved. If you think
that is too confusing I'd rather throw in a comment explaining this
fact rather than making the calculating more complicated.
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-20 23:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-20 22:39 [PATCH] irqchip: plic: Fix priority base offset Alistair Francis
2019-03-20 22:39 ` Alistair Francis
2019-03-20 23:48 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-03-20 23:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-21 0:04 ` Alistair Francis
2019-03-21 0:04 ` Alistair Francis
2019-03-22 13:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-22 13:27 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-03-26 22:26 ` Alistair Francis
2019-03-26 22:26 ` Alistair Francis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190320234858.GA5304@infradead.org \
--to=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=Alistair.Francis@wdc.com \
--cc=alistair23@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@sifive.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.