Re: [PATCH 0/3] Samsung mfd/rtc driver alarm IRQ simplification

["André Draszik" <andre.draszik@linaro.org>]

Hi Lee,

On Thu, 2025-11-20 at 10:31 +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2025, André Draszik wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > With the attached patches the Samsung s5m RTC driver is simplified a
> > little bit with regards to alarm IRQ acquisition.
> > 
> > The end result is that instead of having a list of IRQ numbers for each
> > variant (and a BUILD_BUG_ON() to ensure consistency), the RTC driver
> > queries the 'alarm' platform resource from the parent (mfd cell).
> > 
> > Additionally, we can drop a now-useless field from runtime data,
> > reducing memory consumption slightly.
> > 
> > The attached patches must be applied in-order. I would expect them all
> > to go via the MFD tree. Alternatively, they could be applied one after
> > another during multiple kernel release cycles, but that seems a
> > needless complication.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > André Draszik (3):
> >       mfd: sec: add rtc alarm IRQ as platform device resource
> >       rtc: s5m: query platform device IRQ resource for alarm IRQ
> >       mfd: sec: drop now unused struct sec_pmic_dev::irq_data
> > 
> >  drivers/mfd/sec-common.c         | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> >  drivers/mfd/sec-core.h           |  2 +-
> >  drivers/mfd/sec-irq.c            | 10 ++--------
> >  drivers/rtc/rtc-s5m.c            | 21 ++++++++------------
> >  include/linux/mfd/samsung/core.h |  1 -
> >  5 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> 
> This needs to be rebased now, right?

Yes, I'll do that now. Thanks for merging the other patch.


Cheers,
Andre'