[RFC PATCH 1/1] ARM: imx: enable SPARSE_IRQ for imx
shawn.guo at linaro.org
Wed Jun 20 01:40:17 EDT 2012
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 10:23:15AM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> I did see what you said, but you did not go with reasons and that was not so
> convinced to me
> Can you explain more why you choose linux virt irq and how about the real exist
> potential issues i raised before?
It's not my choice. Instead, this is how struct resource defined in
Linux. What more reasons do you need to understand that?
I do not take the thing you raised as issues, because in the end all
these static definitions will be removed after we move over to device
> Hmm, it's not driver code.
> And i did see a lot of such code in mach-specific file.
That does not mean you are encouraged to add more. We are trying to
> If wrong, any other better way to distinguish the different SoCs?
There are certainly better way, since we have soc specific
initialization to do all the soc specific setup. That said, we do
not have to necessarily use all those ugly cpu_is_xxx and #ifdef.
> That is a way, but i would prefer to do it in mach-specific code first
No. Do not make imx special on this. We would like to use resource
definition in the way how it's defined and how everyone else use it.
> since i'm not sure if other people will also like that.
No one (except yourself) likes it. As I said, we are not supposed to
manipulate resource definition this way.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel