On Friday 29 November 2013 04:21 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Grygorii Strashko
grygorii.stras...@ti.com wrote:
The Davinci GPIO IRQs initialization may need to be performed in a
different way depending on SoC which use it. For example:
- Davinci dm365 has AINTC irq controller, implemented using Generic IRQ
chip, SPARSE_IRQ off;
- Davinci da850 has cp-intc controller, implemented using IRQ chip;
SPARSE_IRQ off;
- Kestone has arm-gic controller, implemented using IRQ chip;
SPARSE_IRQ on;
Now this is a pretty big patch ...
The big question that enters my mind is *why* is the da850 and
dm365 not using SPARSE_IRQ?
As it happens I'm on an ARM32 crusade to get everyone and its
dog to use, among other things, SPARSE_IRQ.
I would feel *much* *much* better if there was first a patch
to the DaVinci tree to turn on SPARSE_IRQ for this subarch,
and then this patch may look a bit different, maybe smaller
I take it?
Is this totally unattainable?
Probably Sekhar can comment but as such the GPIO driver should
work with and without SPARSE_IRQ and thats doable.
Hence, introduce SoC specific initialization data
struct davinci_gpio_init_data {
int (*unbanked_irq_init)(struct platform_device *pdev);
int (*banked_irq_init)(struct platform_device *pdev);
};
which can be selected using compatibility property in case of DT-boot
and update code accordingly by splitting IRQ initialization code to
banked and unbanked IRQs initialization functions.
Select Davinci specific initialization data by default for non-DT boot
case.
Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko grygorii.stras...@ti.com
---
NAK. Lets drop this approach. Its easier to manage the
banked vs unbaked based on compatible as discussed over irc
Regards,
Santosh
___
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
Davinci-linux-open-source@linux.davincidsp.com
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
