lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 13/25] irq_domain: Remove 'new' irq_domain in favour of the ppc one
On Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 03:48:09PM +0100, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> I finally had the time to rebase most of the OMAP3 and OMAP4 DT
> patches on your latest irq_domain series and found a couple of
> minors regressions that breaks OMAP3 boot.
>
> On 1/27/2012 10:36 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c
> >index e04e04dd..aab236f 100644
> >--- a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c
> >+++ b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c
> >@@ -263,8 +263,6 @@ struct twl_client {
> >
> > static struct twl_client twl_modules[TWL_NUM_SLAVES];
> >
> >-static struct irq_domain domain;
> >-
> > /* mapping the module id to slave id and base address */
> > struct twl_mapping {
> > unsigned char sid; /* Slave ID */
> >@@ -1225,14 +1223,8 @@ twl_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id)
> >
> > pdata->irq_base = status;
> > pdata->irq_end = pdata->irq_base + nr_irqs;
> >-
> >- domain.irq_base = pdata->irq_base;
> >- domain.nr_irq = nr_irqs;
> >-#ifdef CONFIG_OF_IRQ
> >- domain.of_node = of_node_get(node);
> >- domain.ops =&irq_domain_simple_ops;
> >-#endif
> >- irq_domain_add(&domain);
> >+ irq_domain_add_legacy(node, nr_irqs, pdata->irq_base, 0,
> >+ &irq_domain_simple_ops);
>
> This commit cannot build due to the missing last parameter.
>
> And in fact you fixed that in the next commit (#14), but the will
> break git bisect and anyway that fix does not really belong to this
> commit.
>
> [PATCH v3 14/25] irq_domain: Remove irq_domain_add_simple()
>
> irq_domain_add_legacy(node, nr_irqs, pdata->irq_base, 0,
> - &irq_domain_simple_ops);
> + &irq_domain_simple_ops, NULL);

Good catch, thanks. I'll update the series to fix that.

>
>
> Moreover, it looks like this new irq_domain code is checking the
> number of hwirq and is not as lazy as the previous one :-)
>
> Because of that and because of the wrong number of IRQs I put for
> the twl4030 :-(, it does not handle properly the children of the
> twl4030 now and print a big warning at boot time due to the
> following check.
>
> WARN_ON(hwirq < first_hwirq || hwirq >= first_hwirq + size)

Good! The warning is doing it's job. :-)

> In fact 8 was just the number for the core functionality, but that
> chip does have some other interrupts for sub function like GPIOs and
> power events.

Okay, I'll add this patch to the series before patch 13.

>
> With the following fix, it works fine.
>
> Regards,
> Benoit
>
>
> ---
> From 12781619d2ab8d6d724acabc6873954f0f9f4347 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2012 14:58:17 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] mfd: twl-core.c: Fix the number of interrupts
> managed by twl4030
>
> TWL4030 does handle 3 different interrupts ranges: 8 for the core, 8
> for the power events and 18 for the GPIOs.
>
> Change the total number of interrupts managed by TWL4030 from 8 to 34.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
> ---
> drivers/mfd/twl-core.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c
> index e63b408..66f9bff 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/twl-core.c
> @@ -149,7 +149,7 @@
>
> #define TWL_MODULE_LAST TWL4030_MODULE_LAST
>
> -#define TWL4030_NR_IRQS 8
> +#define TWL4030_NR_IRQS 34 /* core:8, power:8, gpio: 18 */
> #define TWL6030_NR_IRQS 20
>
> /* Base Address defns for twl4030_map[] */
> --
> 1.7.0.4
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-03 17:45    [W:0.074 / U:4.096 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site