From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753525Ab2BFF4P (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2012 00:56:15 -0500 Received: from mail-iy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.210.174]:35538 "EHLO mail-iy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752769Ab2BFF4O (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Feb 2012 00:56:14 -0500 Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2012 22:56:09 -0700 From: Grant Likely To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Thomas Gleixner , Milton Miller , Rob Herring , Stephen Rothwell , devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/25] irq_domain generalization and refinement Message-ID: <20120206055609.GA21449@ponder.secretlab.ca> References: <1327700179-17454-1-git-send-email-grant.likely@secretlab.ca> <20120204221748.GN14129@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120204221748.GN14129@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 10:17:48PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 02:35:54PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > > Hey everyone, > > > > This patch series is ready for much wider consumption now. I'd like > > to get it into linux-next ASAP because there will be ARM board support > > depending on it. I'll wait a few days before I ask Stephen to pull > > this in. > > Grant, > > Can you answer me this: does this irqdomain support require DT? No, it should not. Any situation where it does is a bug. > Now, here's the thing: I believe that IRQ domains - at least as far as > the hwirq stuff - should be available irrespective of whether we have > the rest of the IRQ domain support code in place, so that IRQ support > code doesn't have to keep playing games to decode from the global > space to the per-controller number space. Correct. That's the intent. My new series flushes out irq_domain quite a bit better and gets all architectures doing the same thing if they use irq_domains. I've done some testing on both CONFIG_OF and !CONFIG_OF builds, but I'm going to do some more to make sure I've not missed anything. > I believe that would certainly help the current OMAP problems, where > the current lack of CONFIG_IRQ_DOMAIN basically makes the kernel oops > on boot. > > How we fix this regression for 3.4 I've no idea at present, I'm trying > to work out what the real dependencies are for OMAP on this stuff. > > Finally, do we need asm/irq.h in our asm/prom.h ? That's causing > fragility between DT and non-DT builds, because people are finding > that their DT builds work without their mach/irqs.h includes but > fail when built with non-DT. The only thing which DT might need - > at the most - is NR_IRQS, but I'd hope with things like irq domains > it doesn't actually require it. I don't think so. There may be a file or two that break because they're not including everything they need, but I don't think anything in the header requires it. The irq_domain code is well isolated. The header file doesn't need to be including it. g.