From: Lee Jones <hidden> Date: 2012-08-09 15:54:39
There was a plan to place ab8500_irq_get_virq() calls in each AB8500
child device prior to requesting an IRQ, but as we're no longer using
Device Tree to collect our IRQ numbers, it's actually better to allow
the core to do this during device registration time. So the IRQ number
we pull from its resource has already been converted to a virtual IRQ.
CC: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
CC: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <redacted>
---
drivers/input/misc/ab8500-ponkey.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Lee Jones [off-list ref] wrote:
There was a plan to place ab8500_irq_get_virq() calls in each AB8500
child device prior to requesting an IRQ, but as we're no longer using
Device Tree to collect our IRQ numbers, it's actually better to allow
the core to do this during device registration time. So the IRQ number
we pull from its resource has already been converted to a virtual IRQ.
CC: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
CC: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <redacted>
This is looking good, I guess you need all patches to go in at the
same time so Dmitry's ACK is required.
FWIW:
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <redacted>
BTW: this makes me suspect that the public ab8500_irq_get_virq()
interface can be *deleted* and the function made static in the
AB8500 driver, right?
Yours,
Linus Walleij
From: Lee Jones <hidden> Date: 2012-08-21 09:23:39
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:31:08AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Lee Jones [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
There was a plan to place ab8500_irq_get_virq() calls in each AB8500
child device prior to requesting an IRQ, but as we're no longer using
Device Tree to collect our IRQ numbers, it's actually better to allow
the core to do this during device registration time. So the IRQ number
we pull from its resource has already been converted to a virtual IRQ.
CC: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
CC: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <redacted>
This is looking good, I guess you need all patches to go in at the
same time so Dmitry's ACK is required.
Yep, just waiting for that now.
FWIW:
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <redacted>
BTW: this makes me suspect that the public ab8500_irq_get_virq()
interface can be *deleted* and the function made static in the
AB8500 driver, right?
Right. Already taken care of.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 10:23:29AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:31:08AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Lee Jones [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
There was a plan to place ab8500_irq_get_virq() calls in each AB8500
child device prior to requesting an IRQ, but as we're no longer using
Device Tree to collect our IRQ numbers, it's actually better to allow
the core to do this during device registration time. So the IRQ number
we pull from its resource has already been converted to a virtual IRQ.
CC: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
CC: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <redacted>
This is looking good, I guess you need all patches to go in at the
same time so Dmitry's ACK is required.
Yep, just waiting for that now.
Sorry for the delay. Yes, this shoudl be fine, but since it is
essentially a revert of the original patch it should be pushed in as
such.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
From: Lee Jones <hidden> Date: 2012-08-30 13:12:12
Sorry for the delay. Yes, this shoudl be fine, but since it is
essentially a revert of the original patch it should be pushed in as
such.
How's this?
Author: Lee Jones [off-list ref]
Date: Thu Aug 30 14:08:19 2012 +0100
Revert "input: ab8500-ponkey: Create AB8500 domain IRQ mapping"
This reverts commit ca3b3faf9bee4dc5df4f10eae2d1e48f7de0a8ad.
There was a plan to place ab8500_irq_get_virq() calls in each AB8500
child device prior to requesting an IRQ, but as we're no longer using
Device Tree to collect our IRQ numbers, it's actually better to allow
the core to do this during device registration time. So the IRQ number
we pull from its resource has already been converted to a virtual IRQ.
CC: Dmitry Torokhov [off-list ref]
CC: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Linus Walleij [off-list ref]
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones [off-list ref]
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 02:12:04PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
quoted
Sorry for the delay. Yes, this shoudl be fine, but since it is
essentially a revert of the original patch it should be pushed in as
such.
How's this?
Excellent.
Author: Lee Jones [off-list ref]
Date: Thu Aug 30 14:08:19 2012 +0100
Revert "input: ab8500-ponkey: Create AB8500 domain IRQ mapping"
This reverts commit ca3b3faf9bee4dc5df4f10eae2d1e48f7de0a8ad.
There was a plan to place ab8500_irq_get_virq() calls in each AB8500
child device prior to requesting an IRQ, but as we're no longer using
Device Tree to collect our IRQ numbers, it's actually better to allow
the core to do this during device registration time. So the IRQ number
we pull from its resource has already been converted to a virtual IRQ.
CC: Dmitry Torokhov [off-list ref]
CC: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
Acked-by: Linus Walleij [off-list ref]
From: Lee Jones <hidden> Date: 2012-08-31 07:31:40
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 04:03:23PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 04:02:21PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
quoted
On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 02:12:04PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
quoted
quoted
Sorry for the delay. Yes, this shoudl be fine, but since it is
essentially a revert of the original patch it should be pushed in as
such.
How's this?
Excellent.
I assume you will be merging it with the rest of AB8500 patches, right?
Yes, if that's okay with you of course?
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel