From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND 2/8] irqchip: Supply new driver for STi based devices Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2015 16:32:31 +0000 Message-ID: <20150123163231.GB11745@x1> References: <1421920133-7914-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1421920133-7914-3-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@stlinux.com, jason@lakedaemon.net, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 23 Jan 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jan 2015, Lee Jones wrote: >=20 > > This driver is used to enable System Configuration Register control= led > > External, CTI (Core Sight), PMU (Performance Management), and PL310= L2 > > Cache IRQs prior to use. >=20 > I'm wondering how this is related to irq_chip,=20 It doesn't really. At least, it doesn't make use of the framework. =20 It was the most relevant subsystem. > but well, I don't mind it being parked here. Thanks Thomas. I was hoping for that response. > Though I really cannot say anything about this DT translation > machinery for a single sysconfig register, other than it looks > completely overengineered to me. I understnad where you're coming from, but don't all drivers just 'twiddle some register bits'? > The only technical comment I have is: shouldn't all the stuff except > the resume function be marked __init or is any of this required post > init? It's not common to mark functions invoked at and affter *_probe() as __init. At least, not as far as I'm aware. --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog