Hi Shawn,

quoted

quoted

I would suggest leave this gpmi specific quirk to gpmi driver to sort
out.  With the following mxs-dma change, it should work if gpmi driver
can pass the valid gpmi irq number for only one gpmi channel, and -1
for all others.

...which brings us right into the 'NO_IRQ is 0' discussion :)

Though I do not know what it means exactly, number 0 is an valid IRQ
on both mx23 and mx28 (see mx23.h and mx28.h).

It could be remapped. It is a looong story. Start here if you are interested:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/11/21/221
http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/no_irq.html

Currently, it's a can of worms. Hopefully, irq_desc might help somewhen.

quoted

Other than that, [thinking loud] this will help if all irq-sharing
channels are handled by the same driver. If not, we would just add
IRQF_SHARED (hopefully this will never be needed). Yup, sounds
reasonable to me. Will give it a second thought later, though.

GPMI is the only mxs-dma user that gets irq-sharing.  So yes, all
irq-sharing channels are handled by the same driver, gpmi-nfc :)

Currently, yes. But we have to make it future-proof.

Regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20110630/2f10ab83/attachment.sig>