On 07/29/2012 02:38 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 01:02:56PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: >> From: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com> >> >> The Arizona chip contains a single interrupt that represents the unified >> output of multiple internal interrupt controllers. This pattern has been >> factored out into regmap-irq, so convert the Arizona driver to use the >> new regmap-irq code. > > So, I didn't like the patch this depends on but anyway.. > >> 1) regmap_add_irq_chips() calls regmap_add_irq_chip() with irq==0 rather >> than -1, so in turn irq_domain_add_linear() is called rather than >> irq_domain_add_legacy(). This change could be avoided by providing an >> irq_bases array to regmap_add_irq_chips(). > > This is a problem.
OK, can you explain why? Is the problem the difference between the two types of IRQ domain? I would have assumed this was an internal detail of the driver hence not an issue. I assume there's no issue with known/static IRQ numbers, since both 0 and -1 end up dynamically allocating the IRQ bases IIRC. >> 2) regmap_add_irq_chips() requests the top-level interrupt itself, so this >> happens before the Arizona driver hooks the child BOOT_DONE and >> CTRLIF_ERR interrupts. In the original, all the IRQ chips were created >> first, and then the top-level IRQ was requested. This may cause a >> functional difference if those interrupts are pending at probe() time. > > Boot done is very likely to be asserted. Hmmm. Perhaps that means regmap_add_irq_chips() should be split into two parts; one to create all the IRQ chips and hook everything together, and the second to actually enable the interrupt. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
