linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v1 4/9] gpio: davinci: make IRQ initialization soc specific

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 29 Nov 2013 11:20:18 -0500
From:	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC:	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@...com>,
	Prabhakar Lad <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com" 
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 4/9] gpio: davinci: make IRQ initialization soc specific

On Friday 29 November 2013 04:21 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Grygorii Strashko
> <grygorii.strashko@...com> wrote:
> 
>> The Davinci GPIO IRQs initialization may need to be performed in a
>> different way depending on SoC which use it. For example:
>> - Davinci dm365 has AINTC irq controller, implemented using Generic IRQ
>> chip, SPARSE_IRQ off;
>> - Davinci da850 has cp-intc controller, implemented using IRQ chip;
>> SPARSE_IRQ off;
>> - Kestone has arm-gic controller, implemented using IRQ chip;
>> SPARSE_IRQ on;
> 
> Now this is a pretty big patch ...
> 
> The big question that enters my mind is *why* is the da850 and
> dm365 not using SPARSE_IRQ?
> 
> As it happens I'm on an ARM32 crusade to get everyone and its
> dog to use, among other things, SPARSE_IRQ.
> 
> I would feel *much* *much* better if there was first a patch
> to the DaVinci tree to turn on SPARSE_IRQ for this subarch,
> and then this patch may look a bit different, maybe smaller
> I take it?
> 
> Is this totally unattainable?
> 
Probably Sekhar can comment but as such the GPIO driver should
work with and without SPARSE_IRQ and thats doable.

> Hence, introduce SoC specific initialization data
> struct davinci_gpio_init_data {
> 	int (*unbanked_irq_init)(struct platform_device *pdev);
> 	int (*banked_irq_init)(struct platform_device *pdev);
> };
> which can be selected using "compatibility" property in case of DT-boot
> and update code accordingly by splitting IRQ initialization code to
> banked and unbanked IRQs initialization functions.
> 
> Select Davinci specific initialization data by default for non-DT boot
> case.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
> ---
NAK. Lets drop this approach. Its easier to manage the
banked vs unbaked based on compatible as discussed over irc

Regards,
Santosh


--
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/