From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: arizona: convert to regmap_add_irq_chips
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 11:20:53 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <501813F5.6020607@wwwdotorg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120730180352.GR4468@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
On 07/30/2012 12:03 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:05:08AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 07/29/2012 02:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 01:02:56PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>
>>>> 1) regmap_add_irq_chips() calls regmap_add_irq_chip() with irq==0 rather
>>>> than -1, so in turn irq_domain_add_linear() is called rather than
>>>> irq_domain_add_legacy(). This change could be avoided by providing an
>>>> irq_bases array to regmap_add_irq_chips().
>
>>> This is a problem.
>
>> OK, can you explain why? Is the problem the difference between the two
>> types of IRQ domain? I would have assumed this was an internal detail of
>> the driver hence not an issue. I assume there's no issue with
>> known/static IRQ numbers, since both 0 and -1 end up dynamically
>> allocating the IRQ bases IIRC.
>
> We have GPIOs we might want to do interrupts on, if the API doesn't
> support providing a base we've got an issue.
I agree in general, but I don't see how this is a regression in this
change - the arizona pdata doesn't specify an IRQ base anywhere, and
hence the IRQ base is already dynamically allocated...
The (regmap-irq) API (in the patch I sent) does support optionally
specifying a base if you want, it's just that the arizona-irq.c patch I
sent didn't specify a base, since the original code didn't.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-31 17:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-27 19:02 Stephen Warren
2012-07-29 20:38 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-30 17:05 ` Stephen Warren
2012-07-30 18:03 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-31 17:20 ` Stephen Warren [this message]
2012-07-31 17:22 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=501813F5.6020607@wwwdotorg.org \
--to=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sameo@linux.intel.com \
--cc=swarren@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome