On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 03:21:11PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:47:44PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:16:38PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

Ideally i would see we keep the code as before that still using hw irqs
for device resource definition, but convert to linux virt irq in a standard
irqdomain map way when adding devices by calling imx_add_platform_device.

What's the point of hiding this irq number conversion in
imx_add_platform_device?  

It's standard and safe way.

Why do you think it's standard?

Why do you think using irq_find_mapping to get the linux virt irq is not
standard way?

I never said using irq_find_mapping to get the linux irq is not
standard way.  What I said is using it during adding platform_device
is nothing standard.

quoted

Care to show me a couple of examples
that make this conversion when adding platform device?

I did not search any example, currently it's just my idea based on my understanding
on irq domain design. Maybe i should give a patch to describe my idea,
then we can discuss on the patch.

I understand your idea, and I just do not think it's a good/right one.

Or did you see any example on using shift way to define device irq resource?
Then i can look at it.

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/171075

quoted

quoted

quoted

The irq number used in resource definition
should simply just be Linux irq.  Doing what you suggest here will

No, it's should be hw irq.

You are simply wrong here.  Nothing more to respond on this.

If using linux virt irq, how do we avoid the issues i said in my last reply?

Do not make up any issue.  I'm only interesting in the practical issues.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn