[PATCH V4 1/2] genirq: Add an accessor for IRQ_PER_CPU flag

[Vinayak Kale]

On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 6:24 AM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd at codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 11/20/13 22:10, Vinayak Kale wrote:
>> [removing chris.smith at st.com]
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Vinayak Kale <vkale at apm.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd at codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>> On 11/20/13 03:13, Vinayak Kale wrote:
>>>>> This patch adds an accessor function for IRQ_PER_CPU flag.
>>>>> The accessor function is useful to dertermine whether an IRQ is percpu or not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vinayak Kale <vkale at apm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>> This looks like a copy of Chris Smith's patch. Shouldn't Chris be the
>>>> author and the commit text be whatever Chris sent?
>>> In the cover letter of this patch series I did mention about Chris's
>>> earlier patch. I didn't know his email-id earlier, have found the
>>> mail-id now. CCing the mail-id to check whether it's still valid.
>>>
>> Chris's mail-id doesn't seem to be valid, the earlier mail to his
>> mail-id [chris.smith at st.com] bounced.
>> Please let me know in such case how to mention original author's credits.
>
> It's up to the maintainer accepting the patch. If I was picking up the
> patch I would say it doesn't really matter if the mail-id is valid
> anymore. Leave the original patch intact and just add your sign-off. If
> you took the patch and significantly changed it it's good to put
> "Based-on-a-patch-by:" and then take over authorship.
>
Thanks for the info.

I have made a minor change w.r.t. Chris's original patch: changed the
accessor function name from irq_is_per_cpu() to irq_is_percpu() since
I think irq_is_percpu() name is more inline with other *percpu* kernel
functions.

I will put Chris's sign-off as well as mine. I hope tglx will be fine with this.