[PATCH] irqchip: add support for Marvell Orion SoCs

Sebastian Hesselbarth
2013-05-02T21:56:46Z

On 05/02/2013 11:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> please do not take the rant below personally. You just happen to
> trigger it.

Thomas,

it is okay for me - but thanks for the notice! I will comment below.

> On Thu, 2 May 2013, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> +static void orion_irq_mask(struct irq_data *irqd)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int irq = irqd_to_hwirq(irqd);
>> + unsigned int irq_off = irq % 32;
>> + int reg = irq / 32;
>> + u32 val;
>> +
>> + val = readl(orion_irq_base[reg] + ORION_IRQ_MASK);
>> + writel(val& ~(1<< irq_off), orion_irq_base[reg] + ORION_IRQ_MASK);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void orion_irq_unmask(struct irq_data *irqd)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int irq = irqd_to_hwirq(irqd);
>> + unsigned int irq_off = irq % 32;
>> + int reg = irq / 32;
>> + u32 val;
>> +
>> + val = readl(orion_irq_base[reg] + ORION_IRQ_MASK);
>> + writel(val | (1<< irq_off), orion_irq_base[reg] + ORION_IRQ_MASK);
>> +}
>
> I'm really tired of looking at the next incarnation of an OF/DT irq
> chip driver, which reimplements stuff which I have consolidated in the
> generic irq chip implementation with a lot of effort.

Actually, non-irqchip implementation of orion intc was based on generic
irq chip already. I took a look at drivers/irqchip and realized that
at least sunxi (ARM again) was reimplementing mask/unmask the way
above. So I took the short path and copied that.

> Just look at the various implementations in drivers/irqchip/ and find
> out how similar they are. Moving code to drivers/irqchip/ does not
> make an excuse for reestablishing the mess which was addressed by the
> generic irq chip implementation.
>
> Can you - and that means all of you ARM folks - please get your gear
> together and add the missing features to the generic irq chip
> implementation? I'm not going to accept more of that OF/DT frenzy.

So you are suggesting to have a "linux,generic-intc" or you want me
to have "marvell,orion-intc" make use of generic irq chip again?

The second is easy, the first will take me a while to think about
proper DT properties how to encode mask/unmask/ack/.. availability
and offsets.

Regards,
Sebastian