On Mon, 30 Sep 2013, Sricharan R wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> index 1760ceb..c5778ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> @@ -72,6 +72,8 @@ struct gic_chip_data {
>
> static DEFINE_RAW_SPINLOCK(irq_controller_lock);
>
> +const struct irq_domain_ops *gic_routable_irq_domain_ops;
> +
> /*
> * The GIC mapping of CPU interfaces does not necessarily match
> * the logical CPU numbering. Let's use a mapping as returned
> @@ -675,11 +677,26 @@ static int gic_irq_domain_map(struct irq_domain *d,
> unsigned int irq,
> irq_set_chip_and_handler(irq, &gic_chip,
> handle_fasteoi_irq);
> set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
> +
> + if (gic_routable_irq_domain_ops &&
> + gic_routable_irq_domain_ops->map)
> + gic_routable_irq_domain_ops->map(d, irq, hw);
Shudder. Why are you sprinkling these if (ops && ops->fun)
conditionals all over the place instead of having a default ops
implementation which handles the non crossbar case by proper empty
functions. That code is not on a hot path so it does not matter at
all.
> }
> irq_set_chip_data(irq, d->host_data);
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void gic_irq_domain_unmap(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq)
> +{
> + irq_hw_number_t hw = irq_get_irq_data(irq)->hwirq;
> +
> + if (hw > 32) {
Groan. This wants to be in the ops->unmap function. It's not related
to the GIC core code.
> + if (gic_routable_irq_domain_ops &&
> + gic_routable_irq_domain_ops->unmap)
> + gic_routable_irq_domain_ops->unmap(d, irq);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static int gic_irq_domain_xlate(struct irq_domain *d,
> struct device_node *controller,
> const u32 *intspec, unsigned int intsize,
> @@ -694,8 +711,15 @@ static int gic_irq_domain_xlate(struct irq_domain *d,
> *out_hwirq = intspec[1] + 16;
>
> /* For SPIs, we need to add 16 more to get the GIC irq ID number */
> - if (!intspec[0])
> - *out_hwirq += 16;
> + if (!intspec[0]) {
> + if (gic_routable_irq_domain_ops &&
> + gic_routable_irq_domain_ops->xlate)
> + *out_hwirq = gic_routable_irq_domain_ops->xlate(d,
> + controller, intspec, intsize,
> + out_hwirq, out_type);
> + else
> + *out_hwirq += 16;
> + }
So if you have a default xlate ops implementation then this boils down to
if (!intspec[0])
*out_hwirq = routing_ops->xlate()
And the default (non crossbar) implementation would be:
return *out_hwirq + 16;
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
