From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linus.walleij@stericsson.com (Linus Walleij) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:53:38 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: vic: register the VIC for ST-modified VIC's In-Reply-To: <20111123154332.GE7382@totoro> References: <1322062110-24084-1-git-send-email-jamie@jamieiles.com> <4ECD13AE.6060409@stericsson.com> <20111123154332.GE7382@totoro> Message-ID: <4ECD1702.90808@stericsson.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 11/23/2011 04:43 PM, Jamie Iles wrote: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 04:39:26PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > >> On 11/23/2011 04:28 PM, Jamie Iles wrote: >> >>> When probing the VIC, the ST variant has a different probing method to >>> account for the extra interrupts which meant we didn't previously call >>> vic_register() which registered the irq_domain. >>> >>> Cc: Linus Walleij >>> Cc: Russell King >>> Cc: Marc Zyngier >>> Signed-off-by: Jamie Iles >>> --- >>> >>> I _think_ it's just Nomadik affected here which I don't have access to. >>> I can send an updated pull request or put it in Russell's tracker, >>> whichever is easiest. >>> >> This also affects mach-u300 and mach-ep93xx OTOH. >> >> This seems to be based on something else that is out-of-tree >> so I don't get the whole picture... >> > Sorry, should have specified the base - this is the VIC device > tree/MULTI_IRQ_HANDLER stuff that is in next. I did look at u300 and > ep93xx, but it looks like their VIC's are 0x1000/0x10000 apart > respectively when registered so weren't the ST type that supported 64 > IRQ's. > Aha OK now I get the difference. Acked-by: Linus Walleij Thanks! Linus Walleij