From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tglx@linutronix.de (Thomas Gleixner) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2014 22:13:28 +0100 (CET) Subject: [PATCH v2] ARM: irqchip: mxs: add Alpascale ASM9260 support In-Reply-To: <545936AD.5060009@rempel-privat.de> References: <20141104130320.GB21210@tiger> <1415128357-12054-1-git-send-email-linux@rempel-privat.de> <545936AD.5060009@rempel-privat.de> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > Am 04.11.2014 um 21:20 schrieb Thomas Gleixner: > > On Tue, 4 Nov 2014, Oleksij Rempel wrote: > > > >> Freescale iMX23/iMX28 and Alphascale ASM9260 have similar > >> interrupt collectors. It makes easy to reuse irq-mxs code for ASM9260. > >> Differences between this devices are fallowing: > >> - different register offsets > >> - different count of intterupt lines per register > >> - ASM9260 don't provide reset bit > >> - ASM9260 don't support FIQ. > > > > Why is this a monolithic patch again. IIRC it was split into a > > prepatory (imx) and alphascale part earlier. But my memory might trick > > me. > > It is not monolithic. first patch is "[PATCH v8 4/9] ARM: irqchip: mxs: > prepare driver for HW with different offsets". So you sent that very patch out of context and then you wonder why I stumble over that? > I don't really wont do discus this irq patches now. Please keep > attention on first two, /arch/arm/ patches. Then do not send them in the first place. I'm not involved in your arch/arm patches, but I care about the stuff which is supposed to hit the part of the tree which I maintain. Please keep your attention on sending stuff in the right order to the right people at the right time. Thanks, tglx