All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: <lee.jones@linaro.org>, <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
	<k.kozlowski@samsung.com>, <javier@osg.samsung.com>,
	<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
	<cw00.choi@samsung.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<rtc-linux@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/6] regmap: irq: add apis to unmap the mapped irq
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 22:26:20 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56B8C8B4.4050207@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160208165912.GK7265@sirena.org.uk>

Adding Thomas in the discussion.

On Monday 08 February 2016 10:29 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:08:28PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> On Monday 08 February 2016 08:25 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 08:07:22PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>>> Before removing irq domains, it is require to unmap all
>>>> mapped interrupt from that domain. Currently there is API
>>>> to map the interrupt on chip as regmap_irq_get_virq() for
>>>> creating mapping. Add equivalent API to dispose the mapped
>>>> irq in irq domains.
>>> This makes no sense to me.  Why would you ever want to unmap the
>>> interrupts separately to destroying the domain
>> This is the requirement from irq_domain_remove(). This is what we have in
>> irq_domain_remove():
>> kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
>> I am adding the API equivalent to regmap_irq_get_virq() to unmap virtual irq
>> here.
> This does not explain why anyone would ever want to use this interface
> (which was my question), why would anyone ever want to do this as a
> separate step?

OK, so you want to say that irq_domain_remove() should take care of 
doing unmap also?

>
>>> and why would you ever
>>> want to destroy the domain without unmapping the interrupts?
>> That's exactlly we are trying to do, unmap interrupt in client level before
>> destroying domain.
> Again, why would any client ever want to skip this step?

If above is yes then we will not need for unmap virtual irq.
So fix need to go in the irq_domain_remove() to unamp before actually 
destroying the irq domain?

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@nvidia.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: <lee.jones@linaro.org>, <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
	<k.kozlowski@samsung.com>, <javier@osg.samsung.com>,
	<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
	<cw00.choi@samsung.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<rtc-linux@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH V4 1/6] regmap: irq: add apis to unmap the mapped irq
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 22:26:20 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56B8C8B4.4050207@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160208165912.GK7265@sirena.org.uk>

Adding Thomas in the discussion.

On Monday 08 February 2016 10:29 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> * PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:08:28PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> On Monday 08 February 2016 08:25 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 08:07:22PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>>>> Before removing irq domains, it is require to unmap all
>>>> mapped interrupt from that domain. Currently there is API
>>>> to map the interrupt on chip as regmap_irq_get_virq() for
>>>> creating mapping. Add equivalent API to dispose the mapped
>>>> irq in irq domains.
>>> This makes no sense to me.  Why would you ever want to unmap the
>>> interrupts separately to destroying the domain
>> This is the requirement from irq_domain_remove(). This is what we have in
>> irq_domain_remove():
>> kernel/irq/irqdomain.c
>> I am adding the API equivalent to regmap_irq_get_virq() to unmap virtual irq
>> here.
> This does not explain why anyone would ever want to use this interface
> (which was my question), why would anyone ever want to do this as a
> separate step?

OK, so you want to say that irq_domain_remove() should take care of 
doing unmap also?

>
>>> and why would you ever
>>> want to destroy the domain without unmapping the interrupts?
>> That's exactlly we are trying to do, unmap interrupt in client level before
>> destroying domain.
> Again, why would any client ever want to skip this step?

If above is yes then we will not need for unmap virtual irq.
So fix need to go in the irq_domain_remove() to unamp before actually 
destroying the irq domain?


-- 
-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to "rtc-linux".
Membership options at http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux .
Please read http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux/web/checklist
before submitting a driver.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rtc-linux" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rtc-linux+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-02-08 17:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-06 14:37 [PATCH V4 0/6] rtc: max77686: make max77686 rtc driver as IP driver Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37 ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37 ` [PATCH V4 1/6] regmap: irq: add apis to unmap the mapped irq Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37   ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-08 14:55   ` Mark Brown
2016-02-08 14:55     ` [rtc-linux] " Mark Brown
2016-02-08 16:38     ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-08 16:38       ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-08 16:59       ` Mark Brown
2016-02-08 16:59         ` [rtc-linux] " Mark Brown
2016-02-08 16:56         ` Laxman Dewangan [this message]
2016-02-08 16:56           ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-08 18:19           ` Mark Brown
2016-02-08 18:19             ` [rtc-linux] " Mark Brown
2016-02-09  5:16             ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09  5:16               ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09  9:08               ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09  9:08                 ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 11:27                 ` Mark Brown
2016-02-09 11:27                   ` [rtc-linux] " Mark Brown
2016-02-09 11:21                   ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-09 11:21                     ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37 ` [PATCH V4 2/6] rtc: max77686: fix checkpatch error Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37   ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37 ` [PATCH V4 3/6] rtc: max77686: use rtc regmap to access RTC registers Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37   ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37 ` [PATCH V4 4/6] rtc: max77686: avoid reference of parent device info multiple places Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37   ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37 ` [PATCH V4 5/6] mfd: max77686: do not set i2c client data for rtc i2c client Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37   ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37 ` [PATCH V4 6/6] rtc: max77686: move initialisation of rtc regmap, irq chip locally Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-06 14:37   ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-08 10:20   ` Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-08 10:20     ` [rtc-linux] " Laxman Dewangan
2016-02-08 10:42     ` Alexandre Belloni
2016-02-08 10:42       ` [rtc-linux] " Alexandre Belloni

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=56B8C8B4.4050207@nvidia.com \
    --to=ldewangan@nvidia.com \
    --cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
    --cc=alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=cw00.choi@samsung.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=javier@osg.samsung.com \
    --cc=k.kozlowski@samsung.com \
    --cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rtc-linux@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.