From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755351Ab0KIKwL (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Nov 2010 05:52:11 -0500 Received: from 124x34x33x190.ap124.ftth.ucom.ne.jp ([124.34.33.190]:48077 "EHLO master.linux-sh.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755278Ab0KIKwI (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Nov 2010 05:52:08 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2010 19:51:45 +0900 From: Paul Mundt To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Alexey Charkov , Florian Tobias Schandinat , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ralf Baechle , "David S. Miller" , vt8500-wm8505-linux-kernel@googlegroups.com, Andrew Morton , Guennadi Liakhovetski , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6 v3] ARM: Add support for the display controllers in VT8500 and WM8505 Message-ID: <20101109105144.GA22389@linux-sh.org> References: <1289147348-31969-1-git-send-email-alchark@gmail.com> <1289147348-31969-6-git-send-email-alchark@gmail.com> <20101108041721.GA11605@linux-sh.org> <20101108141407.GA25739@alchark-u3s.lan> <20101108204315.GA12050@linux-sh.org> <20101109103312.GA2869@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101109103312.GA2869@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 10:33:12AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 05:43:16AM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote: > > > diff --git a/drivers/video/vt8500lcdfb.c b/drivers/video/vt8500lcdfb.c > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 0000000..640d8a3 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/drivers/video/vt8500lcdfb.c > > > +#include > > > + > > linux/irq.h is preferred here. > > I assume you've read the comment at the top of linux/irq.h ? I had forgotten about that. This comment predates git, so I'm unaware of what the context is, could you elaborate on it? I'm aware this won't work for s390, but as that has NO_IOMEM in the first place it's a non-issue. I assume this was added at a time before ARM selected GENERIC_HARDIRQS, but this is no longer the case. The odd ones out that do support iomem are m68k and sparc32, both of which are being converted. Given that and that s390 remains special cased for now, what exactly is the concern? There is a reasonable expectation that we will start to see irq_data references in drivers, so it's not entirely obvious that the assertion made by the comment will remain true (all of the stragglers have work in progress patches already, as far as I'm aware).