Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-10-26 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Florian Fainelli | 2012-10-19 15:40:29 [+0200]: >On Friday 19 October 2012 11:36:25 Fainelli wrote: >> Sebastian Andrzej Siewior linutronix.de> writes: >> > >> > No. You do have a compatible entry. It first appeared on the ce4100 >> > CPU. If it happens to also work on the n450 then it seems

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-10-19 Thread Florian Fainelli
On Friday 19 October 2012 11:36:25 Fainelli wrote: > Sebastian Andrzej Siewior linutronix.de> writes: > > > > No. You do have a compatible entry. It first appeared on the ce4100 > > CPU. If it happens to also work on the n450 then it seems to be > > compatible with that one. "This" is documented

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-10-19 Thread Florian Fainelli
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior linutronix.de> writes: > > No. You do have a compatible entry. It first appeared on the ce4100 > CPU. If it happens to also work on the n450 then it seems to be > compatible with that one. "This" is documented somewhere… > Usually you add 'compatible = "your cpu", "gener

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-08-11 Thread Thierry Reding
On Sat, Aug 11, 2012 at 07:26:38PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > * Thierry Reding | 2012-08-08 14:07:37 [+0200]: > > >With that in place, the driver code can match on "intel,hpet" to catch > >all implementations and use the more specific entries if quirks are > >required for the specif

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-08-11 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
* Thierry Reding | 2012-08-08 14:07:37 [+0200]: >With that in place, the driver code can match on "intel,hpet" to catch >all implementations and use the more specific entries if quirks are >required for the specific hardware. from http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/16/350: |"intel,ioapic" is probably t

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-08-08 Thread Thierry Reding
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 01:51:36PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 08/08/2012 12:46 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: > >On another note, I saw that you've used the "intel,ce4100" prefix in > >various places and I wonder if it would be useful to replace them with > >something more generic like

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-08-08 Thread Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
On 08/08/2012 12:46 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: + id = irq_domain_add_linear(np, num, + &ioapic_irq_domain_ops, + (void *)ioapic_num); This fits on two lines instead of three. k + pr_err("Error creating mapping fo

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-08-08 Thread Thierry Reding
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 09:38:11AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > The former conversion to irq_domain_add_legacy() did not fully work > since we miss the irq decs for NR_IRQS_LEGACY+. > Ideally we could use irq_domain_add_simple() or the no-map variant (and > program the virq <-> line ma

Re: [PATCH] x86/dt: use linear irq domain for ioapic(s).

2012-08-06 Thread Thierry Reding
On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 09:38:11AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > The former conversion to irq_domain_add_legacy() did not fully work > since we miss the irq decs for NR_IRQS_LEGACY+. > Ideally we could use irq_domain_add_simple() or the no-map variant (and > program the virq <-> line ma