[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87a90h6bg7.fsf@free.fr>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 17:08:40 +0100
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev\@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "smc91x: retrieve IRQ and trigger flags in a modern way"
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr> wrote:
>
> But isn't the real problem that in the device tree case,
> irq_get_irq_data(ndev->irq) will work becaus parsing an interrupt
> from the device tree populates it correctly in platform_get_irq()
> whereas for the legacy lookup it just fetches the number.
>
> So to me it seems like a weakness in the platform_get_irq()
> helper altogether.
>
> Does the following work? (I can send as a separate patch for
> testing if you like).
Almost. If you replace :
> + if (r->flags & IORESOURCE_BITS)
with:
> + if (r && (r->flags & IORESOURCE_BITS))
Then you can push a patch with my:
Tested-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
Now if you can make it in -rc2 or -rc3, this revert should be forgotten. But if
you can't make it for 3.20, I'll push for the revert.
So I think it's up to you now, and let's see what Gregh says about it.
Cheers.
--
Robert
--
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