[PATCH] x86/IO-APIC: correct RET polarity comment

Jan Beulich posted 1 patch 4 months, 2 weeks ago
Failed in applying to current master (apply log)
[PATCH] x86/IO-APIC: correct RET polarity comment
Posted by Jan Beulich 4 months, 2 weeks ago
The comment there was the wrong way round, documentation clearly states
that 0 is high and 1 is low.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

--- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ struct IO_APIC_route_entry {
                                            */
             unsigned int dest_mode:1;     /* 0: physical, 1: logical */
             unsigned int delivery_status:1;
-            unsigned int polarity:1;      /* 0: low, 1: high */
+            unsigned int polarity:1;      /* 0: high, 1: low */
             unsigned int irr:1;
             unsigned int trigger:1;       /* 0: edge, 1: level */
             unsigned int mask:1;          /* 0: enabled, 1: disabled */
Re: [PATCH] x86/IO-APIC: correct RET polarity comment
Posted by Jan Beulich 4 months, 2 weeks ago
On 19.12.2023 14:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
> The comment there was the wrong way round, documentation clearly states
> that 0 is high and 1 is low.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

And of course in the title s/RET/RTE/.

Jan

> --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h
> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ struct IO_APIC_route_entry {
>                                             */
>              unsigned int dest_mode:1;     /* 0: physical, 1: logical */
>              unsigned int delivery_status:1;
> -            unsigned int polarity:1;      /* 0: low, 1: high */
> +            unsigned int polarity:1;      /* 0: high, 1: low */
>              unsigned int irr:1;
>              unsigned int trigger:1;       /* 0: edge, 1: level */
>              unsigned int mask:1;          /* 0: enabled, 1: disabled */
Re: [PATCH] x86/IO-APIC: correct RET polarity comment
Posted by Andrew Cooper 4 months, 2 weeks ago
On 19/12/2023 1:51 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.12.2023 14:49, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> The comment there was the wrong way round, documentation clearly states
>> that 0 is high and 1 is low.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> And of course in the title s/RET/RTE/.

Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>