From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [BISECTED] 3.10-rc1 OMAP1 GPIO IRQ regression Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 00:21:12 -0700 Message-ID: <20130624072112.GQ5523@atomide.com> References: <20130516180933.GG5600@atomide.com> <20130516210006.GA31836@blackmetal.musicnaut.iki.fi> <20130516214430.GN5600@atomide.com> <20130520174621.GI10378@atomide.com> <20130605223355.EDC113E10E4@localhost> <20130606155341.GL3331@atomide.com> <20130623221605.GA3150@blackmetal.musicnaut.iki.fi> <20130623234326.GA20703@blackmetal.musicnaut.iki.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mho-03-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.66]:57981 "EHLO mho-01-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752883Ab3FXHV2 (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jun 2013 03:21:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Javier Martinez Canillas Cc: Aaro Koskinen , Grant Likely , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Jon Hunter * Javier Martinez Canillas [130623 18:08]: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Aaro Koskinen 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 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 From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 00:21:12 -0700 Subject: [BISECTED] 3.10-rc1 OMAP1 GPIO IRQ regression In-Reply-To: References: <20130516180933.GG5600@atomide.com> <20130516210006.GA31836@blackmetal.musicnaut.iki.fi> <20130516214430.GN5600@atomide.com> <20130520174621.GI10378@atomide.com> <20130605223355.EDC113E10E4@localhost> <20130606155341.GL3331@atomide.com> <20130623221605.GA3150@blackmetal.musicnaut.iki.fi> <20130623234326.GA20703@blackmetal.musicnaut.iki.fi> Message-ID: <20130624072112.GQ5523@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Javier Martinez Canillas [130623 18:08]: > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Aaro Koskinen 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 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