[PATCH 2/4] mfd: update irq handler in max8925

[haojian.zhuang@gmail.com (Haojian Zhuang)]

On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Haojian Zhuang
<haojian.zhuang@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 6:59 AM, Mark Brown
> <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 06:08:19AM -0500, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
>>
>>> +static struct resource power_supply_resources[] = {
>>> + ? ? {
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? .name ? = "max8925-power",
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? .start ?= MAX8925_CHG_IRQ1,
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? .end ? ?= MAX8925_CHG_IRQ1,
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? .flags ?= IORESOURCE_IO,
>>
>> These should be IORESOURCE_IRQ.
>>
> Now I changed .start and .end. I only need declare IO resources.
>
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? else if (value & irq_data->offs) {
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? dev_err(chip->dev, "Noboday cares IRQ #%d. Mask it\n",
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? chip->irq_base + i);
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? max8925_set_bits(i2c, irq_data->mask_reg,
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? irq_data->offs, irq_data->offs);
>>
>> genirq ought to be handling this for you?
>>
> No, genirq doesn't know this. I let the thread_fn to take this job.
>
>>> + ? ? for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(max8925_irqs); i++) {
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? irq_data = &max8925_irqs[i];
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? /* non TSC IRQ should be serviced in max8925_irq() */
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? if (!irq_data->tsc_irq)
>>> + ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? continue;
>>
>> Shouldn't the interrupt handlers be able to avoid having to iterate
>> through the array? ?It's unlikely to be expensive in the context of the
>> I/O but it looks a bit odd.
>>
> There're multiple IRQ & IRQ_MASK registers. If I use bitmap at here, I
> would use more code on composing it. Since some bits are not defined
> in IRQ, I need to take care on it. If I use array at here, the code is
> clean and simple. Although it looks a bit odd.
>
>>> + * clear_irq: operation on clearing status of nIRQ pin in platform
>>> + * clear_tsc_irq: operation on clearing status of nTIRQ pin in platform
>>> + */
>>
>> Shouldn't these also be handled by genirq as functions of the interrupt
>> controller that the chip is chained from?
>>
> Because PMIC IRQ is connected to the special pin of CPU. CPU needs to
> clear pin status in external. genirq shouldn't take care on it. I have
> to use this ugly way to clear pin status.
>
> Thanks
> Haojian
>

Update the patch now.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0002-mfd-update-irq-handler-in-max8925.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 29103 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20100125/31cf6460/attachment-0001.bin>