Re: [RFC][PATCH v2] ARM: shmobile: R-Car: add gic_iid macro for ICCIAR / interrupt ID

[Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>]

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 08:41:47PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 04:14:31PM -0800, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Magnus
> > 
> > Thank you for your reply
> > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-marzen.c b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-marzen.c
> > > > index cdcb799..2338d4b 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-marzen.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-marzen.c
> > > > @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ static struct resource smsc911x_resources[] = {
> > > >                 .flags          = IORESOURCE_MEM,
> > > >         },
> > > >         [1] = {
> > > > -               .start          = gic_spi(28), /* IRQ 1 */
> > > > +               .start          = gic_iid(0x3c), /* IRQ 1 */
> > > >                 .flags          = IORESOURCE_IRQ,
> > > >         },
> > > >  };
> > > 
> > > In general we're moving over to DT so for this case I can't say that I
> > > care very much. However, if you want to change things around why don't
> > > you just do the following?
> > > 
> > > > +               .start          = 0x3c, /* IRQ 1 */
> > 
> > Actually, I considered this "direct value" style,
> > but I thought that it seems  un-understandable.
> > This gic_iid(xxx) shows some kind of "GIC" value.
> > 
> Agreed. The direct mapping works fine if its understood that the value
> being assigned is a direct IRQ number. In the case that it's some other
> value that's being adapted, it should go through a canonicalization
> wrapper to make the use obvious. Whether there is a 1:1 correlation or
> not doesn't particularly matter, as it's still adopting a non-IRQ
> resource as an IRQ value.

Thanks Paul.

Does anyone have any outstanding objections to v2 of this patch?

Morimoto-san, is this just an RFC or would you like it applied?