[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK8P3a0FfTjNAvJG1yUi==bLBjeVaJ0oseaqs-ZouZKHrFdBHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2019 13:49:47 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...il.com>
Cc: Hubert Feurstein <hubert.feurstein@...tec.at>,
Hartley Sweeten <hsweeten@...ionengravers.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Lukasz Majewski <lukma@...x.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] ARM: ep93xx: enable SPARSE_IRQ
On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 11:14 PM Alexander Sverdlin
<alexander.sverdlin@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 22:44:18 +0200
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> > Ah, that makes sense. so all interrupt numbers need to
> > be shifted by a fixed number (e.g. 1) like we did for
> > other platforms (see attachment).
>
> Yes, the below patch resolved both GPIO and DMA issues.
> Previous patch (selecting IRQ_DOMAIN_HIERARCHY) is not
> required.
>
> If you re-spin all 3 ep93xx-relevant patches together, you can put my
> Tested-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...il.com>
> on them.
Awesome, thanks for testing.
I only remember sending two patches for ep93xx:
ARM: ep93xx: make mach/ep93xx-regs.h local
ARM: ep93xx: enable SPARSE_IRQ
and have added the Tested-by tag to them now. Is there a third one
I missed?
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists