Message ID | 5CC6DF520200007800229EC2@prv1-mh.provo.novell.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
Series | x86: IRQ management adjustments | expand |
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 05:26:10AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: > The subsequent cpumask_intersects() covers the "empty" case quite fine. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
--- a/xen/arch/x86/irq.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/irq.c @@ -638,9 +638,6 @@ void move_masked_irq(struct irq_desc *de desc->status &= ~IRQ_MOVE_PENDING; - if (unlikely(cpumask_empty(pending_mask))) - return; - if (!desc->handler->set_affinity) return;
The subsequent cpumask_intersects() covers the "empty" case quite fine. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>