[PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback

[Marc Gonzalez]

On 25/07/2017 15:16, Måns Rullgård wrote:

> What happened to the patch adding the proper combined function?

It appears you're not CCed on v2.

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9859799/

Doug wrote:
> Yes, you understand correctly.  The irq_mask_ack method is entirely
> optional and I assume that is why this issue went undetected for so
> long; however, it is slightly more efficient to combine the functions
> (even if the ack is unnecessary) which is why I chose to do so for my
> changes to the irqchip-brcmstb-l2 driver where I first discovered this
> issue.  How much value the improved efficiency has is certainly
> debatable, but interrupt handling is one area where people might care
> about such a small difference.  As the irqchip-tango driver maintainer
> you are welcome to decide whether or not the irq_mask_ack method makes
> sense to you.

My preference goes to leaving the irq_mask_ack callback undefined,
and let the irqchip framework use irq_mask and irq_ack instead.

Regards.