* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
@ 2009-09-17 0:32 H Hartley Sweeten
2009-09-18 8:55 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-09-17 0:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
The new code has the following flow:
1) struct vic_device definition, static variables, and to_vic()
moved to the start of the code.
2) vic power management callbacks
3) vic power management initialization/registration
4) irq_chip callbacks
5) vendor specific vic initialization
6) vic initialization
In addition the typo vik_init_st is fixed (vic_init_st).
Signed-off-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com>
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Cc: Alessandro Rubini <rubini-list@gnudd.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com>
---
I originally sent this to the wrong list...
V2 - rebased to current git tree
diff --git a/arch/arm/common/vic.c b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
index 920ced0..f9e0016 100644
--- a/arch/arm/common/vic.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
@@ -27,48 +27,6 @@
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
#include <asm/hardware/vic.h>
-static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
-}
-
-/**
- * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
- * @base: Base of the VIC.
- *
- * Common initialisation code for registeration
- * and resume.
-*/
-static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
-{
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
-}
-
#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
/**
* struct vic_device - VIC PM device
@@ -98,13 +56,34 @@ struct vic_device {
/* we cannot allocate memory when VICs are initially registered */
static struct vic_device vic_devices[CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR];
+static int vic_id;
+
static inline struct vic_device *to_vic(struct sys_device *sys)
{
return container_of(sys, struct vic_device, sysdev);
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
-static int vic_id;
+/**
+ * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
+ * @base: Base of the VIC.
+ *
+ * Common initialisation code for registeration
+ * and resume.
+*/
+static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
+ }
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static int vic_class_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
{
struct vic_device *vic = to_vic(dev);
@@ -158,31 +137,6 @@ struct sysdev_class vic_class = {
};
/**
- * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
- * @base: The base address of the VIC.
- * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
- * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
- *
- * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
- * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
- * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
- */
-static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
-{
- struct vic_device *v;
-
- if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
- printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
- else {
- v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
- v->base = base;
- v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
- v->irq = irq;
- vic_id++;
- }
-}
-
-/**
* vic_pm_init - initicall to register VIC pm
*
* This is called via late_initcall() to register
@@ -218,9 +172,60 @@ static int __init vic_pm_init(void)
return 0;
}
-
late_initcall(vic_pm_init);
+/**
+ * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
+ * @base: The base address of the VIC.
+ * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
+ * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
+ *
+ * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
+ * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
+ * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
+ */
+static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
+{
+ struct vic_device *v;
+
+ if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
+ printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
+ else {
+ v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
+ v->base = base;
+ v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
+ v->irq = irq;
+ vic_id++;
+ }
+}
+#else
+static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
+
+static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static struct vic_device *vic_from_irq(unsigned int irq)
{
struct vic_device *v = vic_devices;
@@ -254,10 +259,7 @@ static int vic_set_wake(unsigned int irq, unsigned int on)
return 0;
}
-
#else
-static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
-
#define vic_set_wake NULL
#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
@@ -269,9 +271,62 @@ static struct irq_chip vic_chip = {
.set_wake = vic_set_wake,
};
-/* The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST, so handle both here */
-static void vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources);
+/*
+ * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
+ * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
+ * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
+ * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
+ * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
+ */
+static void __init vic_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
+ u32 vic_sources)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+ int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
+
+ /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
+
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+
+ /*
+ * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
+ * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
+ * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
+ * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
+ */
+ if (vic_2nd_block) {
+ writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
+ unsigned int value;
+
+ value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+ /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(0, reg);
+ }
+
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
+ if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
+ unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
+
+ set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
+ set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
+ set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
+ set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
+ }
+ }
+}
/**
* vic_init - initialise a vectored interrupt controller
@@ -298,7 +353,7 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
switch(vendor) {
case AMBA_VENDOR_ST:
- vik_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
+ vic_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
return;
default:
printk(KERN_WARNING "VIC: unknown vendor, continuing anyways\n");
@@ -342,60 +397,3 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
vic_pm_register(base, irq_start, resume_sources);
}
-
-/*
- * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
- * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
- * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
- * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
- * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
- */
-static void __init vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources)
-{
- unsigned int i;
- int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
-
- /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
-
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
- writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-
- /*
- * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
- * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
- * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
- * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
- */
- if (vic_2nd_block) {
- writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
- unsigned int value;
-
- value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- }
- /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(0, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
- }
-
- for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
- if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
- unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
-
- set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
- set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
- set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
- set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
- }
- }
-}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-09-17 0:32 [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2009-09-18 8:55 ` Linus Walleij
2009-09-18 16:23 ` H Hartley Sweeten
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2009-09-18 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
2009/9/17 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
> This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
> to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
This doesn't apply cleanly to -next anymore, can you send an
updated version and I'll test it?
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-09-18 8:55 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2009-09-18 16:23 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-09-18 16:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-09-18 16:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Friday, September 18, 2009 1:56 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2009/9/17 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
>
>> This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
>> to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
>
> This doesn't apply cleanly to -next anymore, can you send an
> updated version and I'll test it?
Hmm... Applies fine to -next here.
The only thing I can think of that might keep it from applying is if
your -next tree has the patch you posted to include device.h in the
driver. That patch is of course needed so that the file will build
but I have not seen anything about someone picking it up yet. That
patch will fuzz mine by one line.
I was hoping your patch would get merged soon to fix the build. I
was then planning on rebasing this patch. I just wanted to get this
out now for any comments.
Regards,
Hartley
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-09-18 16:23 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2009-09-18 16:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2009-09-18 16:33 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-09-25 1:56 ` H Hartley Sweeten
0 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2009-09-18 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:23:26PM -0400, H Hartley Sweeten wrote:
> The only thing I can think of that might keep it from applying is if
> your -next tree has the patch you posted to include device.h in the
> driver. That patch is of course needed so that the file will build
> but I have not seen anything about someone picking it up yet. That
> patch will fuzz mine by one line.
>
> I was hoping your patch would get merged soon to fix the build. I
> was then planning on rebasing this patch. I just wanted to get this
> out now for any comments.
The patch adding device.h to vic.c is queued for this Saturday's push.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-09-18 16:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
@ 2009-09-18 16:33 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-09-25 1:56 ` H Hartley Sweeten
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-09-18 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Friday, September 18, 2009 9:31 AM, Russell King wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:23:26PM -0400, H Hartley Sweeten wrote:
>> The only thing I can think of that might keep it from applying is if
>> your -next tree has the patch you posted to include device.h in the
>> driver. That patch is of course needed so that the file will build
>> but I have not seen anything about someone picking it up yet. That
>> patch will fuzz mine by one line.
>>
>> I was hoping your patch would get merged soon to fix the build. I
>> was then planning on rebasing this patch. I just wanted to get this
>> out now for any comments.
>
> The patch adding device.h to vic.c is queued for this Saturday's push.
Thanks for the update Russell. I will rebase this patch after that.
Regards,
Hartley
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-09-18 16:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2009-09-18 16:33 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2009-09-25 1:56 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-10-05 19:45 ` H Hartley Sweeten
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-09-25 1:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
The new code has the following flow:
1) struct vic_device definition, static variables, and to_vic()
moved to the start of the code.
2) vic power management callbacks
3) vic power management initialization/registration
4) irq_chip callbacks
5) vendor specific vic initialization
6) vic initialization
In addition the typo vik_init_st is fixed (vic_init_st).
Signed-off-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com>
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Cc: Alessandro Rubini <rubini-list@gnudd.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com>
---
V3 - rebased to 2.6.31-gitcur
diff --git a/arch/arm/common/vic.c b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
index f232941..c04f6ac 100644
--- a/arch/arm/common/vic.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
@@ -28,48 +28,6 @@
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
#include <asm/hardware/vic.h>
-static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
-}
-
-/**
- * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
- * @base: Base of the VIC.
- *
- * Common initialisation code for registeration
- * and resume.
-*/
-static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
-{
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
-}
-
#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
/**
* struct vic_device - VIC PM device
@@ -99,13 +57,34 @@ struct vic_device {
/* we cannot allocate memory when VICs are initially registered */
static struct vic_device vic_devices[CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR];
+static int vic_id;
+
static inline struct vic_device *to_vic(struct sys_device *sys)
{
return container_of(sys, struct vic_device, sysdev);
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
-static int vic_id;
+/**
+ * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
+ * @base: Base of the VIC.
+ *
+ * Common initialisation code for registeration
+ * and resume.
+*/
+static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
+ }
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static int vic_class_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
{
struct vic_device *vic = to_vic(dev);
@@ -159,31 +138,6 @@ struct sysdev_class vic_class = {
};
/**
- * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
- * @base: The base address of the VIC.
- * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
- * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
- *
- * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
- * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
- * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
- */
-static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
-{
- struct vic_device *v;
-
- if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
- printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
- else {
- v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
- v->base = base;
- v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
- v->irq = irq;
- vic_id++;
- }
-}
-
-/**
* vic_pm_init - initicall to register VIC pm
*
* This is called via late_initcall() to register
@@ -219,9 +173,60 @@ static int __init vic_pm_init(void)
return 0;
}
-
late_initcall(vic_pm_init);
+/**
+ * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
+ * @base: The base address of the VIC.
+ * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
+ * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
+ *
+ * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
+ * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
+ * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
+ */
+static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
+{
+ struct vic_device *v;
+
+ if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
+ printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
+ else {
+ v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
+ v->base = base;
+ v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
+ v->irq = irq;
+ vic_id++;
+ }
+}
+#else
+static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
+
+static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static struct vic_device *vic_from_irq(unsigned int irq)
{
struct vic_device *v = vic_devices;
@@ -255,10 +260,7 @@ static int vic_set_wake(unsigned int irq, unsigned int on)
return 0;
}
-
#else
-static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
-
#define vic_set_wake NULL
#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
@@ -270,9 +272,62 @@ static struct irq_chip vic_chip = {
.set_wake = vic_set_wake,
};
-/* The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST, so handle both here */
-static void vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources);
+/*
+ * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
+ * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
+ * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
+ * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
+ * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
+ */
+static void __init vic_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
+ u32 vic_sources)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+ int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
+
+ /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
+
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+
+ /*
+ * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
+ * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
+ * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
+ * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
+ */
+ if (vic_2nd_block) {
+ writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
+ unsigned int value;
+
+ value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+ /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(0, reg);
+ }
+
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
+ if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
+ unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
+
+ set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
+ set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
+ set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
+ set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
+ }
+ }
+}
/**
* vic_init - initialise a vectored interrupt controller
@@ -299,7 +354,7 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
switch(vendor) {
case AMBA_VENDOR_ST:
- vik_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
+ vic_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
return;
default:
printk(KERN_WARNING "VIC: unknown vendor, continuing anyways\n");
@@ -343,60 +398,3 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
vic_pm_register(base, irq_start, resume_sources);
}
-
-/*
- * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
- * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
- * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
- * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
- * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
- */
-static void __init vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources)
-{
- unsigned int i;
- int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
-
- /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
-
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
- writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-
- /*
- * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
- * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
- * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
- * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
- */
- if (vic_2nd_block) {
- writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
- unsigned int value;
-
- value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- }
- /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(0, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
- }
-
- for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
- if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
- unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
-
- set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
- set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
- set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
- set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
- }
- }
-}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-09-25 1:56 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2009-10-05 19:45 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-10-09 16:46 ` H Hartley Sweeten
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-10-05 19:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Ping.. Any comments on this?
Regards,
Hartley
-----Original Message-----
From: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org [mailto:linux-arm-kernel-bounces at lists.infradead.org] On Behalf Of H Hartley Sweeten
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 6:56 PM
To: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
Cc: Linus Walleij; rubini-list at gnudd.com; Ben Dooks
Subject: RE: [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
The new code has the following flow:
1) struct vic_device definition, static variables, and to_vic()
moved to the start of the code.
2) vic power management callbacks
3) vic power management initialization/registration
4) irq_chip callbacks
5) vendor specific vic initialization
6) vic initialization
In addition the typo vik_init_st is fixed (vic_init_st).
Signed-off-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com>
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Cc: Alessandro Rubini <rubini-list@gnudd.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com>
---
V3 - rebased to 2.6.31-gitcur
diff --git a/arch/arm/common/vic.c b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
index f232941..c04f6ac 100644
--- a/arch/arm/common/vic.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
@@ -28,48 +28,6 @@
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
#include <asm/hardware/vic.h>
-static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
-}
-
-/**
- * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
- * @base: Base of the VIC.
- *
- * Common initialisation code for registeration
- * and resume.
-*/
-static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
-{
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
-}
-
#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
/**
* struct vic_device - VIC PM device
@@ -99,13 +57,34 @@ struct vic_device {
/* we cannot allocate memory when VICs are initially registered */
static struct vic_device vic_devices[CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR];
+static int vic_id;
+
static inline struct vic_device *to_vic(struct sys_device *sys)
{
return container_of(sys, struct vic_device, sysdev);
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
-static int vic_id;
+/**
+ * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
+ * @base: Base of the VIC.
+ *
+ * Common initialisation code for registeration
+ * and resume.
+*/
+static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
+ }
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static int vic_class_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
{
struct vic_device *vic = to_vic(dev);
@@ -159,31 +138,6 @@ struct sysdev_class vic_class = {
};
/**
- * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
- * @base: The base address of the VIC.
- * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
- * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
- *
- * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
- * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
- * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
- */
-static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
-{
- struct vic_device *v;
-
- if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
- printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
- else {
- v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
- v->base = base;
- v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
- v->irq = irq;
- vic_id++;
- }
-}
-
-/**
* vic_pm_init - initicall to register VIC pm
*
* This is called via late_initcall() to register
@@ -219,9 +173,60 @@ static int __init vic_pm_init(void)
return 0;
}
-
late_initcall(vic_pm_init);
+/**
+ * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
+ * @base: The base address of the VIC.
+ * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
+ * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
+ *
+ * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
+ * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
+ * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
+ */
+static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
+{
+ struct vic_device *v;
+
+ if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
+ printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
+ else {
+ v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
+ v->base = base;
+ v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
+ v->irq = irq;
+ vic_id++;
+ }
+}
+#else
+static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
+
+static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static struct vic_device *vic_from_irq(unsigned int irq)
{
struct vic_device *v = vic_devices;
@@ -255,10 +260,7 @@ static int vic_set_wake(unsigned int irq, unsigned int on)
return 0;
}
-
#else
-static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
-
#define vic_set_wake NULL
#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
@@ -270,9 +272,62 @@ static struct irq_chip vic_chip = {
.set_wake = vic_set_wake,
};
-/* The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST, so handle both here */
-static void vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources);
+/*
+ * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
+ * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
+ * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
+ * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
+ * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
+ */
+static void __init vic_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
+ u32 vic_sources)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+ int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
+
+ /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
+
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+
+ /*
+ * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
+ * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
+ * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
+ * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
+ */
+ if (vic_2nd_block) {
+ writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
+ unsigned int value;
+
+ value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+ /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(0, reg);
+ }
+
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
+ if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
+ unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
+
+ set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
+ set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
+ set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
+ set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
+ }
+ }
+}
/**
* vic_init - initialise a vectored interrupt controller
@@ -299,7 +354,7 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
switch(vendor) {
case AMBA_VENDOR_ST:
- vik_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
+ vic_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
return;
default:
printk(KERN_WARNING "VIC: unknown vendor, continuing anyways\n");
@@ -343,60 +398,3 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
vic_pm_register(base, irq_start, resume_sources);
}
-
-/*
- * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
- * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
- * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
- * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
- * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
- */
-static void __init vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources)
-{
- unsigned int i;
- int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
-
- /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
-
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
- writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-
- /*
- * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
- * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
- * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
- * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
- */
- if (vic_2nd_block) {
- writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
- unsigned int value;
-
- value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- }
- /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(0, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
- }
-
- for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
- if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
- unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
-
- set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
- set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
- set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
- set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
- }
- }
-}
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-10-05 19:45 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2009-10-09 16:46 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-10-12 9:02 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-10-09 16:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
The new code has the following flow:
1) struct vic_device definition, static variables, and to_vic()
moved to the start of the code.
2) vic power management callbacks
3) vic power management initialization/registration
4) irq_chip callbacks
5) vendor specific vic initialization
6) vic initialization
In addition the typo vik_init_st is fixed (vic_init_st).
Signed-off-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com>
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Cc: Alessandro Rubini <rubini-list@gnudd.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com>
---
V4 - rebased to 2.6.32-rc3 due to whitespace issue (Alessandro Rubini)
V3 - rebased to 2.6.31-gitcur
diff --git a/arch/arm/common/vic.c b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
index f232941..666153f 100644
--- a/arch/arm/common/vic.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
@@ -28,48 +28,6 @@
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
#include <asm/hardware/vic.h>
-static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
-}
-
-/**
- * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
- * @base: Base of the VIC.
- *
- * Common initialisation code for registeration
- * and resume.
-*/
-static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
-{
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
-}
-
#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
/**
* struct vic_device - VIC PM device
@@ -99,13 +57,34 @@ struct vic_device {
/* we cannot allocate memory when VICs are initially registered */
static struct vic_device vic_devices[CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR];
+static int vic_id;
+
static inline struct vic_device *to_vic(struct sys_device *sys)
{
return container_of(sys, struct vic_device, sysdev);
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
-static int vic_id;
+/**
+ * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
+ * @base: Base of the VIC.
+ *
+ * Common initialisation code for registeration
+ * and resume.
+*/
+static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
+ }
+
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+}
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static int vic_class_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
{
struct vic_device *vic = to_vic(dev);
@@ -159,31 +138,6 @@ struct sysdev_class vic_class = {
};
/**
- * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
- * @base: The base address of the VIC.
- * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
- * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
- *
- * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
- * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
- * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
- */
-static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
-{
- struct vic_device *v;
-
- if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
- printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
- else {
- v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
- v->base = base;
- v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
- v->irq = irq;
- vic_id++;
- }
-}
-
-/**
* vic_pm_init - initicall to register VIC pm
*
* This is called via late_initcall() to register
@@ -219,9 +173,60 @@ static int __init vic_pm_init(void)
return 0;
}
-
late_initcall(vic_pm_init);
+/**
+ * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
+ * @base: The base address of the VIC.
+ * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
+ * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
+ *
+ * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
+ * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
+ * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
+ */
+static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
+{
+ struct vic_device *v;
+
+ if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
+ printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
+ else {
+ v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
+ v->base = base;
+ v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
+ v->irq = irq;
+ vic_id++;
+ }
+}
+#else
+static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
+
+static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static struct vic_device *vic_from_irq(unsigned int irq)
{
struct vic_device *v = vic_devices;
@@ -255,10 +260,7 @@ static int vic_set_wake(unsigned int irq, unsigned int on)
return 0;
}
-
#else
-static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
-
#define vic_set_wake NULL
#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
@@ -270,10 +272,62 @@ static struct irq_chip vic_chip = {
.set_wake = vic_set_wake,
};
-/* The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST, so handle both here */
-static void vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources);
+/*
+ * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
+ * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
+ * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
+ * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
+ * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
+ */
+static void __init vic_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
+ u32 vic_sources)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+ int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
+
+ /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
+
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+
+ /*
+ * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
+ * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
+ * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
+ * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
+ */
+ if (vic_2nd_block) {
+ writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
+ unsigned int value;
+
+ value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+ /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(0, reg);
+ }
+
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
+ if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
+ unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
+ set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
+ set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
+ set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
+ set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
+ }
+ }
+}
/**
* vic_init - initialise a vectored interrupt controller
* @base: iomem base address
@@ -299,7 +353,7 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
switch(vendor) {
case AMBA_VENDOR_ST:
- vik_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
+ vic_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
return;
default:
printk(KERN_WARNING "VIC: unknown vendor, continuing anyways\n");
@@ -343,60 +397,3 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
vic_pm_register(base, irq_start, resume_sources);
}
-
-/*
- * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
- * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
- * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
- * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
- * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
- */
-static void __init vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources)
-{
- unsigned int i;
- int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
-
- /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
-
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
- writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-
- /*
- * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
- * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
- * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
- * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
- */
- if (vic_2nd_block) {
- writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
- unsigned int value;
-
- value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- }
- /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(0, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
- }
-
- for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
- if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
- unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
-
- set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
- set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
- set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
- set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
- }
- }
-}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-10-09 16:46 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2009-10-12 9:02 ` Linus Walleij
2009-10-12 17:01 ` H Hartley Sweeten
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2009-10-12 9:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
2009/10/9 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
> This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
> to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
I've tried to test this but I've got some real mangling problems when I
bring up the raw mail, =20 =3D and =<newline> all over the place,
I don't know if this is all my own fault, so that gmail mangles it.
Can you send me a copy as an attachment that I can test?
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-10-12 9:02 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2009-10-12 17:01 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-12-21 16:05 ` H Hartley Sweeten
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-10-12 17:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Monday, October 12, 2009 2:02 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2009/10/9 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
>
>> This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a future patch
>> to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
>
> I've tried to test this but I've got some real mangling problems when I
> bring up the raw mail, =20 =3D and =<newline> all over the place,
> I don't know if this is all my own fault, so that gmail mangles it.
> Can you send me a copy as an attachment that I can test?
Hello Linus,
Attached is the patch. Hopefully it's gmail that's screwing it up...
Please see if this applies correctly.
Thanks,
Hartley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vic_reorg2.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 9660 bytes
Desc: vic_reorg2.patch
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20091012/3798bda8/attachment-0001.obj>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-10-12 17:01 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2009-12-21 16:05 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2010-01-07 22:15 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2009-12-21 16:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
[ARM] vic.c: reorganize code
This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a second patch
to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
The code now has the following flow:
1) struct vic_device definition, static variables, and to_vic()
moved to the start of the code.
2) common code (vic_init2)
3) vic power management callbacks
4) vic power management initialization/registration
5) irq_chip callbacks
6) vendor specific vic initialization
7) vic initialization
In addition the typo vik_init_st is fixed (vic_init_st).
There is no functional change with this patch.
Signed-off-by: H Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@visionengravers.com>
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Cc: Alessandro Rubini <rubini-list@gnudd.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@gmail.com>
---
This patch had merge issues last time I posted it. Hopefully it works now.
Rebased on 2.6.33-rc1.
diff --git a/arch/arm/common/vic.c b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
index f232941..1cf999a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/common/vic.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/vic.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
* along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
* Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
*/
+
#include <linux/init.h>
#include <linux/list.h>
#include <linux/io.h>
@@ -28,48 +29,6 @@
#include <asm/mach/irq.h>
#include <asm/hardware/vic.h>
-static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
-}
-
-static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
-{
- void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
- irq &= 31;
- writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
-}
-
-/**
- * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
- * @base: Base of the VIC.
- *
- * Common initialisation code for registeration
- * and resume.
-*/
-static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
-{
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
-}
-
#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
/**
* struct vic_device - VIC PM device
@@ -99,13 +58,34 @@ struct vic_device {
/* we cannot allocate memory when VICs are initially registered */
static struct vic_device vic_devices[CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR];
+static int vic_id;
+
static inline struct vic_device *to_vic(struct sys_device *sys)
{
return container_of(sys, struct vic_device, sysdev);
}
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
-static int vic_id;
+/**
+ * vic_init2 - common initialisation code
+ * @base: Base of the VIC.
+ *
+ * Common initialisation code for registeration
+ * and resume.
+*/
+static void vic_init2(void __iomem *base)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(VIC_VECT_CNTL_ENABLE | i, reg);
+ }
+
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+}
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static int vic_class_resume(struct sys_device *dev)
{
struct vic_device *vic = to_vic(dev);
@@ -159,31 +139,6 @@ struct sysdev_class vic_class = {
};
/**
- * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
- * @base: The base address of the VIC.
- * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
- * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
- *
- * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
- * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
- * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
- */
-static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
-{
- struct vic_device *v;
-
- if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
- printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
- else {
- v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
- v->base = base;
- v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
- v->irq = irq;
- vic_id++;
- }
-}
-
-/**
* vic_pm_init - initicall to register VIC pm
*
* This is called via late_initcall() to register
@@ -219,9 +174,60 @@ static int __init vic_pm_init(void)
return 0;
}
-
late_initcall(vic_pm_init);
+/**
+ * vic_pm_register - Register a VIC for later power management control
+ * @base: The base address of the VIC.
+ * @irq: The base IRQ for the VIC.
+ * @resume_sources: bitmask of interrupts allowed for resume sources.
+ *
+ * Register the VIC with the system device tree so that it can be notified
+ * of suspend and resume requests and ensure that the correct actions are
+ * taken to re-instate the settings on resume.
+ */
+static void __init vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 resume_sources)
+{
+ struct vic_device *v;
+
+ if (vic_id >= ARRAY_SIZE(vic_devices))
+ printk(KERN_ERR "%s: too few VICs, increase CONFIG_ARM_VIC_NR\n", __func__);
+ else {
+ v = &vic_devices[vic_id];
+ v->base = base;
+ v->resume_sources = resume_sources;
+ v->irq = irq;
+ vic_id++;
+ }
+}
+#else
+static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
+#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
+
+static void vic_ack_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ /* moreover, clear the soft-triggered, in case it was the reason */
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+}
+
+static void vic_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
+{
+ void __iomem *base = get_irq_chip_data(irq);
+ irq &= 31;
+ writel(1 << irq, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+}
+
+#if defined(CONFIG_PM)
static struct vic_device *vic_from_irq(unsigned int irq)
{
struct vic_device *v = vic_devices;
@@ -255,10 +261,7 @@ static int vic_set_wake(unsigned int irq, unsigned int on)
return 0;
}
-
#else
-static inline void vic_pm_register(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq, u32 arg1) { }
-
#define vic_set_wake NULL
#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
@@ -270,9 +273,62 @@ static struct irq_chip vic_chip = {
.set_wake = vic_set_wake,
};
-/* The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST, so handle both here */
-static void vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources);
+/*
+ * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
+ * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
+ * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
+ * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
+ * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
+ */
+static void __init vic_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
+ u32 vic_sources)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+ int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
+
+ /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
+
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
+ writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
+ writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
+
+ /*
+ * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
+ * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
+ * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
+ * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
+ */
+ if (vic_2nd_block) {
+ writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
+ unsigned int value;
+
+ value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+ /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
+ for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
+ void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
+ writel(0, reg);
+ }
+
+ writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
+ }
+
+ for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
+ if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
+ unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
+
+ set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
+ set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
+ set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
+ set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
+ }
+ }
+}
/**
* vic_init - initialise a vectored interrupt controller
@@ -299,7 +355,7 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
switch(vendor) {
case AMBA_VENDOR_ST:
- vik_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
+ vic_init_st(base, irq_start, vic_sources);
return;
default:
printk(KERN_WARNING "VIC: unknown vendor, continuing anyways\n");
@@ -343,60 +399,3 @@ void __init vic_init(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
vic_pm_register(base, irq_start, resume_sources);
}
-
-/*
- * The PL190 cell from ARM has been modified by ST to handle 64 interrupts.
- * The original cell has 32 interrupts, while the modified one has 64,
- * replocating two blocks 0x00..0x1f in 0x20..0x3f. In that case
- * the probe function is called twice, with base set to offset 000
- * and 020 within the page. We call this "second block".
- */
-static void __init vik_init_st(void __iomem *base, unsigned int irq_start,
- u32 vic_sources)
-{
- unsigned int i;
- int vic_2nd_block = ((unsigned long)base & ~PAGE_MASK) != 0;
-
- /* Disable all interrupts initially. */
-
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_SELECT);
- writel(0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_ENABLE_CLEAR);
- writel(0, base + VIC_IRQ_STATUS);
- writel(0, base + VIC_ITCR);
- writel(~0, base + VIC_INT_SOFT_CLEAR);
-
- /*
- * Make sure we clear all existing interrupts. The vector registers
- * in this cell are after the second block of general registers,
- * so we can address them using standard offsets, but only from
- * the second base address, which is 0x20 in the page
- */
- if (vic_2nd_block) {
- writel(0, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- for (i = 0; i < 19; i++) {
- unsigned int value;
-
- value = readl(base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- writel(value, base + VIC_PL190_VECT_ADDR);
- }
- /* ST has 16 vectors as well, but we don't enable them by now */
- for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
- void __iomem *reg = base + VIC_VECT_CNTL0 + (i * 4);
- writel(0, reg);
- }
-
- writel(32, base + VIC_PL190_DEF_VECT_ADDR);
- }
-
- for (i = 0; i < 32; i++) {
- if (vic_sources & (1 << i)) {
- unsigned int irq = irq_start + i;
-
- set_irq_chip(irq, &vic_chip);
- set_irq_chip_data(irq, base);
- set_irq_handler(irq, handle_level_irq);
- set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
- }
- }
-}
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2009-12-21 16:05 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2010-01-07 22:15 ` Linus Walleij
2010-01-07 22:50 ` H Hartley Sweeten
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2010-01-07 22:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
2009/12/21 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
> [ARM] vic.c: reorganize code
> This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a second patch
> to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
I would love to test this patch but again cannot *for my life* decode this QP
stuff, having tried now for half an hour. Can you send it directly as an
attachment instead or even put it in Russells patch tracker?
Linus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2010-01-07 22:15 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2010-01-07 22:50 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2010-01-12 8:34 ` Linus Walleij
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: H Hartley Sweeten @ 2010-01-07 22:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Thursday, January 07, 2010 3:16 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2009/12/21 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
>
>> [ARM] vic.c: reorganize code
>> This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a second patch
>> to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
>
> I would love to test this patch but again cannot *for my life* decode
> this QP stuff, having tried now for half an hour. Can you send it
> directly as an attachment instead or even put it in Russells patch
> tracker?
What QP stuff?
Russell does not like the patch tracker used as a patch review system.
I have attached the patch, hopefully you have better results with that.
Regards,
Hartley
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vic_reorg.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 9765 bytes
Desc: vic_reorg.patch
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20100107/bcfb9b64/attachment-0001.obj>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2010-01-07 22:50 ` H Hartley Sweeten
@ 2010-01-12 8:34 ` Linus Walleij
2010-01-12 12:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2010-01-12 8:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
2010/1/7 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
> [ARM] vic.c: reorganize code
> This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a second patch
> to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
Works like a charm on the U300!
Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2010-01-12 8:34 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2010-01-12 12:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-01-13 12:58 ` Alessandro Rubini
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Russell King - ARM Linux @ 2010-01-12 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:34:41AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 2010/1/7 H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@visionengravers.com>:
>
> > [ARM] vic.c: reorganize code
> > This reorganizes the vic.c code in anticipation of a second patch
> > to use struct vic_device as the data stored in set_irq_chip_data().
>
> Works like a charm on the U300!
> Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>
Great, I guess the patch is ready.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization
2010-01-12 12:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
@ 2010-01-13 12:58 ` Alessandro Rubini
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Alessandro Rubini @ 2010-01-13 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Fine on Nomadik too (the only one that uses 64 irqs in the vic, I suppose).
But I confirm the orignal mail doesn't apply. I used the one attached
as a non-git patch.
>> Tested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>
Tested-by: Alessandro Rubini <rubini@unipv.it>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-01-13 12:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-09-17 0:32 [PATCH] arch/arm/common/vic.c: code reorganization H Hartley Sweeten
2009-09-18 8:55 ` Linus Walleij
2009-09-18 16:23 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-09-18 16:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2009-09-18 16:33 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-09-25 1:56 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-10-05 19:45 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-10-09 16:46 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-10-12 9:02 ` Linus Walleij
2009-10-12 17:01 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2009-12-21 16:05 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2010-01-07 22:15 ` Linus Walleij
2010-01-07 22:50 ` H Hartley Sweeten
2010-01-12 8:34 ` Linus Walleij
2010-01-12 12:19 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-01-13 12:58 ` Alessandro Rubini
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).