Message-ID: <7hoakni1hk.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>
Date:	Wed, 10 Jun 2015 16:32:07 -0700
From:	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>
To:	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"arm@...nel.org" <arm@...nel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
	Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] Kill off set_irq_flags

Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org> writes:

> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 01:26:26PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> This series converts all users of ARM specific set_irq_flags to use
>>> common genirq functions. In many cases where irqdomains are used, the
>>> set_irq_flags calls were redundant, so I've removed them.
>>>
>>> This is not intended for 4.2, but if any subsystem maintainers want to
>>> pick up their subsystem's change that is fine. All but the last 2
>>> patches stand on their own. Any new drivers going into 4.2 may need a
>>> similar change, but I'm sure people are told not to use set_irq_flags in
>>> reviews. ;)
>>
>> So what are you doing about the initial state of IRQs on legacy ARM where
>> IRQs start off being un-requestable, and need the set_irq_flags() to make
>> them requestable.  I think you could be introducing a massive regression
>> by making this change.
>
> None of that changes. The initial state is set by ARCH_IRQ_INIT_FLAGS
> which I've not changed:
>
> #define ARCH_IRQ_INIT_FLAGS     (IRQ_NOREQUEST | IRQ_NOPROBE)
>
>> Unless you can prove that this isn't the case, you shouldn't be removing
>> this stuff, especially not from legacy platforms.
>
> set_irq_flags() only does a translation from custom ARM IRQF_* flags
> to standard flags and then calls irq_modify_status(). This only
> removes the translation and users set/clear standard flags directly.
> It is a straight-forward removal of a wrapper function.
>
> I *would* like to get rid of ARCH_IRQ_INIT_FLAGS and have the same
> defaults across arches, but yes that would likely cause regressions.

For some reason, I don't have  00/15 in my inbox or list folders, so
replying here...

I gave this series a spin through the kernelci.org build/boot bot where
it was booted on ~20 different ARM SoC families and mulitple different
defconfigs, and there were no boot failures, so it at least passes a
basic boot sanity check.

If you think it's appropriate, feel free to add :

Tested-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>

Kevin

[1] http://kernelci.org/boot/all/job/khilman/kernel/v4.1-rc7-15-g64b9a5c929f7/
--
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