[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <12288210.VhBfyMlq8V@wuerfel>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:12:57 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] gpio: ep93xx: remove private irq_to_gpio function
On Tuesday 16 February 2016 16:51:57 Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 4:46 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> > The ep93xx goes through its own back-and-forth dance every time
> > it wants to know the gpio number for an irq line, when it really
> > just hardcodes a fixed offset in ep93xx_gpio_to_irq().
> >
> > This removes the pointless macro and replaces the conversion inside
> > of the driver with simple add/subtract operations, using an
> > explicit macro.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> (...)
>
> > -#include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
> > -/* FIXME: this is here for gpio_to_irq() - get rid of this! */
> > #include <linux/gpio.h>
>
> No, what you want to get rid of is the #include <linux/gpio.h> not the
> <linux/gpio/driver.h>, we want to be more specific. Sorry for putting the
> comment wrong.
I think I initially did that, but ran into another build error then.
>
> > @@ -35,6 +31,7 @@ void __iomem *ep93xx_gpio_base; /* FIXME: put this into irq_data */
> > #define EP93XX_GPIO_LINE_MAX 63
> >
> > /* maximum value for irq capable line identifiers */
> > +#define EP93XX_GPIO_IRQ_BASE 64
> > #define EP93XX_GPIO_LINE_MAX_IRQ 23
>
> This doesn't apply to my tree :O
>
> My EP93XX_GPIO_LINE_MAX_IRQ is in
> arch/arm/mach-ep93xx/include/mach/gpio-ep93xx.h
>
> So I think you must be having another patch somewhere in the ARM SoC
> tree. (I can take it, just send it along with an update of this one.)
Ah, that is right. Let's just drop this patch for now,
it's not important.
I have an old patch below to make the driver independent of
the headers, but I have to look at that patch again before
submitting it. I'll sort this one next to it.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists