From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 15:30:22 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 8/9] dma IPU: rework irq handling In-Reply-To: References: <1305878365-827-1-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> <1305878365-827-10-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: <20110520133022.GE10403@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 03:16:42PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 20 May 2011, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > @@ -354,48 +139,41 @@ static struct irq_chip ipu_irq_chip = { > > /* Install the IRQ handler */ > > int __init ipu_irq_attach_irq(struct ipu *ipu, struct platform_device *dev) > > { > > - struct ipu_platform_data *pdata = dev->dev.platform_data; > > - unsigned int irq, irq_base, i; > > + unsigned int irq, irq_base; > > > > - irq_base = pdata->irq_base; > > + irq_base = irq_alloc_descs(-1, 0, IPU_IRQ_NR_BANKS * 32, 0); > > IPU_NUM_IRQS perhaps ? > > > + if (irq_base < 0) > > + return irq_base; > > So this allocates 160 interrupts. How many of them are actually going > to be used ? One for the framebuffer and another one for the camera... BTW often enough it's the same for the gpio interrupts. I have plenty of boards ending up with a single gpio interrupt out of 160 used for a external network controller. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |