[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5112F1B9.6010700@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:13:45 -0700
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
Anmar Oueja <anmar.oueja@...aro.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/14] pinctrl/abx500: use direct IRQ defines
On 02/05/2013 12:48 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
>
> Make it harder to do mistakes by introducing the actual
> defined ABx500 IRQ number into the IRQ cluster definitions.
> Deduct cluster offset from the GPIO offset to make each
> cluster coherent.
Shouldn't this patch be squashed into the previous patch to avoid churn?
> static struct abx500_pinctrl_soc_data ab9540_soc = {
> @@ -273,8 +273,7 @@ static int abx500_gpio_to_irq(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> - hwirq = gpio + cluster->to_irq;
> -
> + hwirq = gpio - cluster->start + cluster->to_irq;
> return irq_create_mapping(pct->parent->domain, hwirq);
In particular, this change implies that the previous patch was simply
incorrect, although I haven't really thought about it in detail.
--
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