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 [PATCH] mfd: arizona: convert to regmap_add_irq_chips 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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.