Hi Marc,

[...]

quoted

-	/*
-	 * We're probed after MSI domains have been resolved, so force
-	 * resolution here.
-	 */
-	pdev->dev.msi_domain = of_msi_get_domain(&pdev->dev, node,
-						 DOMAIN_BUS_PLATFORM_MSI);
-	if (!pdev->dev.msi_domain)
-		return -EPROBE_DEFER;
-
-	gicp_dn = irq_domain_get_of_node(pdev->dev.msi_domain);
-	if (!gicp_dn)
-		return -ENODEV;
-
 	/*
 	 * Clean all ICU interrupts with type SPI_NSR, required to
 	 * avoid unpredictable SPI assignments done by firmware.

@@ -282,16 +297,9 @@ static int mvebu_icu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 			regmap_write(icu->regmap, ICU_INT_CFG(i), 0);
 	}
 
-	irq_domain =
-		platform_msi_create_device_domain(&pdev->dev, ICU_MAX_IRQS,
-						  mvebu_icu_write_msg,
-						  &mvebu_icu_domain_ops, icu);
-	if (!irq_domain) {
-		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to create ICU domain\n");
-		return -ENOMEM;
-	}
+	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, icu);  

What is the upshot of passing this icu pointer as part of the platform
device structure instead of simply passing it as a parameter? Is
anything else using it?

Not at this stage of the series, but right after the patch
"irqchip/irq-mvebu-icu: support ICU subnodes" does the following:

@@ -299,7 +356,10 @@ static int mvebu_icu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, icu);
 
-	return mvebu_icu_subset_probe(pdev);
+	if (icu->legacy_bindings)
+		return mvebu_icu_subset_probe(pdev);
+	else
+		return devm_of_platform_populate(&pdev->dev);
 }
  

Using driver data in both cases was, from my point of view, the easiest
(meanwhile, I'll simplify it thanks to another comment you made).

Thanks,
Miqu?l