From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 08:37:58 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 15/16] ARM: fiq: save FIQ_START by passing absolute fiq
 number
In-Reply-To: <20120620233614.GH2253@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
References: <1339653587-4832-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org>
 <1339653587-4832-16-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org>
 <20120618143128.GF19249@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
 <20120618164402.GA18630@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120619052654.GC21951@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
 <20120620225520.GA30087@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120620233614.GH2253@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
Message-ID: <20120621073758.GA16617@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 07:53:20AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:55:20PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 01:26:56PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 05:44:02PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > FIQs should be an entirely separate number space from IRQs, as we
> > > > may want to totally decouple them from the IRQ stuff (we probably
> > > > should have already done this when genirq came along.)
> > > > 
> > > > About the only stuff FIQs use is the enable/disable_irq as a short
> > > > cut to dealing with the mask registers.
> > > 
> > > I do not quite understand what you are asking for, but I'm guessing it
> > > with the patch below.  Please elaborate it a little bit more if that's
> > > not what you are asking for.
> > 
> > I was thinking about moving entirely away from any bits of genirq for
> > this.  We shouldn't really be mixing these two things together by
> > nabbing some of the IRQ numberspace for this.
> > 
> > Looking at this code, I'm thinking about taking this further, and
> > santising the whole thing... though that's not going to be a quick
> > change.
> 
> What I'm looking for is a quick and safe fixing for a compile error
> when SPARSE_IRQ enabled for imx.  Can we take the original patch as
> it is and defer the whole cleanup to another series?

No, I don't want to make FIQ numbers somehow the same as IRQ numbers,
not even "temporarily".