[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1306111609110.22970@ionos>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 16:13:31 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>
cc: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] irqchip: add support for Marvell Orion SoCs
On Tue, 11 Jun 2013, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> On 06/11/13 15:45, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > But what about the bit in of that first irq in the cause register? If
> > it's set on entry you call generic_handle_irq() for that as well. So
> > if it's set you need to mask it in stat. If not, then it wants a
> > comment.
>
> I am not sure I can follow. orion_bridge_irq_init() maps the first
> parent irq, i.e. hwirq 0 of orion_irq. The parent irq controller
> clears that irq cause when all corresponding chained irqs are
> cleared. The chained (bridge) irqs are cleared by
> orion_bridge_irq_handler above.
That makes sense. I got confused by:
irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, 0);
but now I see that it's mapping irq 0 of the parent interrupt
controller. I'll add a comment before merging it.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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