Hi Linus,

Thank you for your answer.

On Thursday 25 July 2013 11:20:54 Linus Walleij wrote:

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:

quoted

Has anyone run into a similar issue ? My gut feeling is that the
architecture isn't right somewhere, but I can't really pinpoint where.

We had a similar situation with the MFDs, where Mark, Lee and Sam came up
with the solution to include an irqdomain in the MFD cell spawn function:

extern int mfd_add_devices(struct device *parent, int id,
                           struct mfd_cell *cells, int n_devs,
                           struct resource *mem_base,
                           int irq_base, struct irq_domain *irq_domain);

When each cell (i.e. a platform device) is created, the irq for that cell
will be translated with irq_create_mapping() so the cell/platform device
just get a Linux IRQ it can use and do not need to worry about translating
it.

Prior to this we had all sorts of exported translator functions for the IRQs
exported from each hub driver ---what a mess.

Can you think about a parent/child relationship making it possible to pass
the irqs readily translated in this case?

The two devices are independent, so there's no real parent/child relationship. 
However, as Grant proposed, I could list all the interrupts associated with 
GPIOs in the GPIO controller DT node. I would then just call 
irq_of_parse_and_map() in the .to_irq() handler to magically translate the 
GPIO number to a mapped IRQ number.

The number of interrupts can be pretty high (up to 58 in the worst case so 
far), so an alternative would be to specify the interrupt-parent only, and 
call irq_create_of_mapping() directly. What solution would you prefer ?

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart