[PATCH] ARM: gic: refactor irq_start assignment

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 04:03:34PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 04:02:09PM +0000, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On 01/17/2012 06:09 AM, Will Deacon wrote:

quoted

The irq_start and hwirq_base assignment code is fairly hairy and ended
up being difficult to read following a conflict resolution for 3.2.

This patch rearranges the code slightly to make it easier to read.

Cc: Marc Zyngier <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <redacted>
---
 arch/arm/common/gic.c |   13 ++++++-------
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/common/gic.c b/arch/arm/common/gic.c
index c47d619..ca6b5dd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/common/gic.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/gic.c

@@ -694,13 +694,12 @@ void __init gic_init_bases(unsigned int gic_nr, int irq_start,
 	 * For primary GICs, skip over SGIs.
 	 * For secondary GICs, skip over PPIs, too.
 	 */
-	domain->hwirq_base = 32;
-	if (gic_nr == 0) {
-		if ((irq_start & 31) > 0) {
-			domain->hwirq_base = 16;
-			if (irq_start != -1)
-				irq_start = (irq_start & ~31) + 16;
-		}
+	if (gic_nr == 0 && (irq_start & 31) > 0) {
+		domain->hwirq_base = 16;
+		if (irq_start != -1)
+			irq_start = (irq_start & ~31) + 16;
+	} else {
+		domain->hwirq_base = 32;
 	}

This should probably just be rolled into Grant's irqdomain work. In any
case, it's going to conflict with it.

Ok, it's purely cosmetic so I'm fine with that. Grant - would you be able to
pick this up please?

The conflict is pretty trivial and I'll handle any fixups if a
conflict occurs.  I'd rather not have changes unrelated to the
conversion in my series.

g.