[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F200DFD.7070407@ti.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 15:13:17 +0100
From: "Cousson, Benoit" <b-cousson@...com>
To: Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
CC: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@....com>, <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 00/14]
On 1/23/2012 10:53 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 01/23/2012 03:07 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
>>
>> Hey everyone,
>>
>> Here's the second RFC for the irq_domain patches. I could use some
>> help testing now. I still expect there will be a few bugs. The
>> series is based on v3.3-rc1, and I've pushed it out to my git server:
>>
>> git://git.secretlab.ca/git/linux-2.6.git irqdomain/next
>
> Can you post to linux-arm-kernel too so people are aware of this work
> and stop posting dead-end irqdomain patches.
Good point, I have two pending series that are using the
irq_domain_add() so far, so it will be good to have that branch pulled
in arm-soc.
> I tested what you had as of this morning and it works fine for me. Looks
> like the only diff is the VExpress code. I'm working on rebasing my
> domain support for generic irqchip now.
In fact your generic irqchip should even avoid us to use
irq_domain_add_legacy() since both GPIO and OMAP3 intc are already using
the irqchip.
I guess you are not going to change the interface so the patches I did
on your previous branch to try them should be good already, isn't it?
Thanks,
Benoit
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists