[PATCH v2 4/7] ARM: pxa: add devicetree code for irq handling

[Daniel Mack]

Hi Haojian,

On 28.07.2012 09:17, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Daniel Mack <zonque at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Properly register on-chip interrupt using the irqdomain logic. The
>> number of interrupts is taken from the devicetree node.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <zonque at gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm/mach-pxa/irq.c    | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  arch/arm/mach-pxa/pxa3xx.c | 17 +++++++++--
>>  2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF
>> +static struct irq_domain *pxa_irq_domain;
>> +
>> +static int pxa_irq_map(struct irq_domain *h, unsigned int virq,
>> +                      irq_hw_number_t hw)
>> +{
>> +       int irq, i = hw % 32;
>> +       void __iomem *base = irq_base(hw / 32);
>> +
>> +       /* initialize interrupt priority */
>> +       if (cpu_has_ipr())
>> +               __raw_writel(i | IPR_VALID, IRQ_BASE + IPR(i));
> Since we have DT support at here. Could we use property for interrupt priority?

Not sure what you mean here. Can you elaborate? I couldn't find any
reference to IRQ priorities in other platforms either.

Maybe we can also add that in a separate patch, which would also help in
tracking possible regressions du to such a change?

>> +       irq = PXA_IRQ(virq);
> #ifdef CONFIG_PXA_HAVE_ISA_IRQS
> #define PXA_ISA_IRQ(x)  (x)
> #define PXA_ISA_IRQ_NUM (16)
> #else
> #define PXA_ISA_IRQ_NUM (0)
> #endif
> 
> Could we avoid to use PXA_IRQ() at here? We can make use of
> NR_IRQS_LEGACY that is 16. Since you already use irq_alloc_descs()
> to allocate irqs that virtual irq number starts from 16. So you needn't
> use PXA_IRQ() any more.

Ok, I changed this. Note that there's still need to subtract
NR_IRQS_LEGACY from the virq that is passed in to the .map function,
because early_irq_init() in kernel/irq/irqdesc.c will pre-allocate the
IRQs the platform claims to have natively, which defaults to 16 on PXA,
unless the machine descriptor sets nr_irqs, which it doesn't in case of DT.

I also found another hunk that I forgot to squash in the v2 series. I
will repost the whole thing and also include the two GPIO patches that
should go through your tree.


Thanks for the review,

Daniel