From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-px0-f192.google.com (mail-px0-f192.google.com [209.85.216.192]) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75629B7B60 for ; Sun, 13 Sep 2009 00:06:14 +1000 (EST) Received: by pxi30 with SMTP id 30so1491136pxi.7 for ; Sat, 12 Sep 2009 07:06:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: glikely@secretlab.ca In-Reply-To: <1252736925.8375.65.camel@pasglop> References: <20090912054410.21847.63718.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <1252736925.8375.65.camel@pasglop> From: Grant Likely Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 08:05:52 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] powerpc/irq: Add generic API for setting up cascaded IRQs To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 23:46 -0600, Grant Likely wrote: >> From: Grant Likely >> >> prototype implementation. =A0This probably doesn't work at all right now= . >> >> Ben, I'm posting this now to get your thoughts before I go too far down >> this path. > > Looks ok. I was initially thinking about putting get_irq() in irq_host, > but as we discussed on IRC, a host is not necessarily a PIC, and it's > nice for the parent to have a way to setup/init the cascade in case > it needs to do some HW tweaking there as well. Cool. Thanks for the review. I'll continue on with this approach and hopefully get something working this weekend. > However, why cascade_setup() and not setup_cascade() which sounds > somewhat more natural ? :-) I'm a reverse polish kind of guy. I preferring 'subject'_'action' over 'action'_'subject' just because it groups like subjects together. But it doesn't matter much, especially in this case where 'subject' is in a group of exactly 1. :-) I'll do whichever you prefer. g. --=20 Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.