Re: [PATCH 0/4 v6] i.MX31: dmaengine and framebuffer drivers

["Hans J. Koch" <hjk@linutronix.de>]

On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 11:19:29AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 10:51:37AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Hi Sascha
> > 
> > On Tue, 6 Jan 2009, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Guennadi,
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 06:11:13PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > This is version 6 of dmaengine and framebuffer drivers for i.MX31.
> > > > 
> > > > Changes since version 5: as requested by Sascha Hauer switched to dynamic 
> > > > IPU IRQ mapping.
> > > 
> > > I tried to express that it's really odd that you demux your _internal_
> > > interrupts as chained handlers.
> > 
> > Your last comment was:
> > 
> > > Preferably a way which does not involve introducing 100+ unused
> > > interrupts.
> > 
> > which I have done. Now we're back to demux / not demux...
> 
> Can *please* anybody else say something to this issue to calm this down?
> To make it easier for you please sign:
> 
> [ ] The code is fine the way it is. Sascha go home.
> [ ] The code could be better, but hey, it works and the world is not
>     perfect.
> [x] No, we shouldn't abuse chained interrupts for internal irq
>     dispatching.

Definitly the last one, for the reasons you gave in your last mail.
Using chained irqs is not the natural thing to do here.

Thanks,
Hans