From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Add MPC52xx Interrupt controller support for ARCH=powerpc From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Nicolas DET In-Reply-To: <45471B57.6040109@bplan-gmbh.de> References: <200610292310.k9TNAHXZ013852@post.webmailer.de> <1162268830.25682.271.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4546F68C.6070900@bplan-gmbh.de> <1162279296.25682.297.camel@localhost.localdomain> <45470006.1020004@bplan-gmbh.de> <1162281518.25682.305.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4547093E.6070502@bplan-gmbh.de> <1162284291.25682.323.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4547119C.3060208@bplan-gmbh.de> <1162285628.25682.326.camel@localhost.localdomain> <45471B57.6040109@bplan-gmbh.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 07:29:32 +1100 Message-Id: <1162326572.25682.330.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, sl@bplan-gmbh.de, sha@pengutronix.de, linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2006-10-31 at 10:46 +0100, Nicolas DET wrote: > Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > >> Ok. that's why I suggest to keep buggy (or none) firmware board in > >> platform specific code. > > > > Well, in that case, we have a well defined interface to set the sense > > code, via the device-tree, and that's much better than having platform > > code muck around the PIC hardware separately from the PIC driver don't > > you think ? > > > > Anyway, that's the way it works in Linux/powerpc so there is no need > > debating that for ever. Just be aware that at one point, there will be a > > set_type() implementation in this driver and that it will be called > > based on the polarity information in the device-tree so make sure you > > got it right. > > > > Ok. set_type() is scheduled for later on or should it be included right now? > What's next should be done to finally acked the driver? Post the latest one and we'll see.. Ben