From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq_domain: Standardise legacy/linear domain selection
Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 23:39:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120519223924.GC16590@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACxGe6vqzOyeLf8okuo2OdTFUaB_E=5KFSN11n05vgEyJzpmBQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1112 bytes --]
On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 02:59:51PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> It will actually be like all legacy users switched to creating an
> linear mapping, and then either associating already allocated
> irq_descs with that domain or telling the domain to pre-map a specific
> range of irq_descs (and manage allocations). Those two use cases will
> be separate APIs. I don't think they should be combined (at least
> from my current thinking) because it depends on whether or not the
> irq_descs are already allocated.
Hrm. Given that the target for this API is drivers that mostly don't
care and are only supporting the current linear mappings in order to
allow their GPIOs to be used with generic drivers that only want an IRQ
I'd expect we'll wind up with a similar helper somehow. Copying a
number around for irq_start isn't much hassle for individual drivers but
having to worry about more than that seems like too much effort, they
shouldn't have to care about the management of irq_descs. It'd be more
work and it'd make it more painful for platforms to change between the
preallocated and dynamic models.
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-19 22:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-19 12:02 [PATCH] irq_domain: Standardise legacy/linear domain selection Mark Brown
2012-05-19 20:22 ` Grant Likely
2012-05-19 20:54 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-19 20:59 ` Grant Likely
2012-05-19 22:39 ` Mark Brown [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-07-05 11:19 Mark Brown
2012-07-05 11:43 ` Andy Shevchenko
2012-07-05 12:02 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-11 14:06 ` Grant Likely
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120519223924.GC16590@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox