On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 20:49:46 +0100,
Florian Fainelli [off-list ref] wrote:

On 9/27/21 12:43 PM, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 2:28 PM Florian Fainelli [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 9/27/21 12:08 PM, Rob Herring wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:07 PM Florian Fainelli [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

In order to build drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm7120-l2.c as a module, we will
need to have of_irq_count() exported to modules.

Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/of/irq.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/of/irq.c b/drivers/of/irq.c
index 352e14b007e7..949b9d1f8729 100644
--- a/drivers/of/irq.c
+++ b/drivers/of/irq.c

@@ -440,6 +440,7 @@ int of_irq_count(struct device_node *dev)

        return nr;
 }
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_irq_count);

Please convert to use platform_irq_count() instead.

That requires a platform_device to be passed to platform_irq_count(),
will that work even when the drivers remain built into the kernel and
get initialized early on?

No, does your irqchip using this do both? Looks to me like it is
always a platform_device.

On ARM/ARM64 not using GKI as well as MIPS, we would want the module to
be built into the kernel image, however when using GKI that driver would
become a module. How do you suggest reconciling both usages?

I don't see what GKI has to do with anything. Either the driver can be
built as a module (and it is in this case a platform device at all
times, built-in or not), or it cannot, and it falls into the
IRQCHIP_DECLARE() category (and there is no export problem).

Pick your poison!

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel