Re: [BISECTED] 3.10-rc1 OMAP1 GPIO IRQ regression

[Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>]

* Javier Martinez Canillas <martinez.javier@gmail.com> [130623 18:08]:
> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@iki.fi> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 01:06:37AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@iki.fi> wrote:
> >> > What is the status of this patch? We're already at 3.10-rc7 and GPIO
> >> > IRQs are still broken on OMAP1.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> There is a problem with this patch.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >> So I think that the correct solution is to add SPARSE_IRQ support to
> >> omap1 and not reverting Jon's patch. Of course this may not be
> >> possible since we are so close to 3.10 and most OMAP patches already
> >> merged for 3.11 but we should definitely try to have this at least for
> >> 3.12. Otherwise we won't be able to move to DT-only booting for
> >> OMAP2+.
> >
> > OMAP1 does not use DT. So we could put this code under #ifdef
> > CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP1 or similar. It's just a few lines of code. OMAP2+
> > work should not regress OMAP1.
> >
> > Demanding SPARSE_IRQ support for OMAP1 should have been discussed before
> > these changes were made. It's not reasonable to assume such things can
> > be made during rc-cycle. Also, now, I don't think it's reasonable to
> > wait for that to be done, as it would take until 3.12 or even later to
> > get OMAP1 functional again.
> >
> > A.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Yes, since we are so late in the -rc cycle and OMAP1 is currently
> broken I agree that the only sensible solution is to revert the patch
> for now.

Agreed.
 
> I just wanted to point out the issue that keeping the OMAP GPIO driver
> using legacy mapping domain represents a blocker to have GPIO-IRQ
> working with Device Tree for OMAP2+

Yes. We can do the ifdef Aaro suggested, and let's also plan on
converting omap1 to use SPARSE_IRQ. But with the ifdef we can cut
away the dependency between these two.

Regards,

Tony