From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932074AbaIBWWe (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Sep 2014 18:22:34 -0400 Received: from mail-vc0-f178.google.com ([209.85.220.178]:39449 "EHLO mail-vc0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755251AbaIBWWc (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Sep 2014 18:22:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1409350479-19108-1-git-send-email-abrestic@chromium.org> <6179185.bNbDBEC6tl@wuerfel> <3341001.1Jsp173xyM@wuerfel> Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 15:22:31 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: KKLUbcHnmdW7RGZPnnvfbdDl6Zs Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] MIPS: GIC: Move MIPS_GIC_IRQ_BASE into platform irq.h From: Andrew Bresticker To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Ralf Baechle , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Jeffrey Deans , Markos Chandras , Paul Burton , Thomas Gleixner , Jason Cooper , Linux-MIPS , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Andrew Bresticker wrote: > On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Sunday 31 August 2014 11:54:04 Andrew Bresticker wrote: >>> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> > On Friday 29 August 2014 15:14:31 Andrew Bresticker wrote: >>> >> Define a generic MIPS_GIC_IRQ_BASE which is suitable for Malta and >>> >> the upcoming Danube board in . Since Sead-3 is >>> >> different and uses a MIPS_GIC_IRQ_BASE equal to the CPU IRQ base (0), >>> >> define its MIPS_GIC_IRQ_BASE in . >>> >> >>> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Bresticker >>> >> >>> > >>> > Why do you actually have to hardwire an IRQ base? Can't you move >>> > to the linear irqdomain code for DT based MIPS systems yet? >>> >>> Neither Malta nor SEAD-3 use device-tree for interrupts yet, so they >>> still require a hard-coded IRQ base. For boards using device-tree, I >>> stuck with a legacy IRQ domain as it allows most of the existing GIC >>> irqchip code to be reused. >> >> I see. Note that we now have irq_domain_add_simple(), which should >> do the right think in either case: use a legacy domain when a >> nonzero base is provided for the old boards, but use the simple >> domain when probed from DT without an irq base. >> >> This makes the latter case more memory efficient (it avoids >> allocating the irq descriptors for every possibly but unused >> IRQ number) and helps ensure that you don't accidentally rely >> on hardcoded IRQ numbers for the DT based machines, which would >> be considered a bug. > > Ah, ok. It looks like add_simple() is what I want then. Actually, never mind. To re-use the existing GIC irqchip code I want a legacy IRQ domain.