From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] TI Davinci EMAC : add platform specific interrupt enable/disable logic. Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:29:54 -0800 Message-ID: <87pr7fbh5p.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <1258537328-31527-1-git-send-email-srk@ti.com> <1258537328-31527-2-git-send-email-srk@ti.com> <1258537328-31527-3-git-send-email-srk@ti.com> <4B044628.9030701@boundarydevices.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Sriramakrishnan , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com To: Troy Kisky Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f171.google.com ([209.85.222.171]:51163 "EHLO mail-pz0-f171.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751986AbZKRW3u (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:29:50 -0500 Received: by pzk1 with SMTP id 1so1126715pzk.33 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 14:29:56 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4B044628.9030701@boundarydevices.com> (Troy Kisky's message of "Wed\, 18 Nov 2009 12\:08\:24 -0700") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Troy Kisky writes: > Sriramakrishnan wrote: >> On certain SOCs, the EMAC controller is interfaced with a wrapper logic >> for handling interrupts. This patch implements a platform >> specific hook to cater to platforms that require custom interrupt >> handling logic >> >> Signed-off-by: Sriramakrishnan >> Acked-by: Chaithrika U S >> --- >> drivers/net/davinci_emac.c | 11 +++++++++++ >> include/linux/davinci_emac.h | 2 ++ >> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/davinci_emac.c b/drivers/net/davinci_emac.c >> index 6aec8f5..81931f8 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/davinci_emac.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/davinci_emac.c >> @@ -487,6 +487,9 @@ struct emac_priv { >> struct mii_bus *mii_bus; >> struct phy_device *phydev; >> spinlock_t lock; >> + /*platform specific members*/ >> + void (*wrapper_int_enable) (void); >> + void (*wrapper_int_disable) (void); > > Would platform_int_enable be more appropriate then wrapper_int_enable ? > Or just int_enable. As it's being used through a private pointer, it's clear that it's a wrapper. Kevin