IRQ code inconsistencies across platforms

[Grant Likely]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:26:20 +1300 (NZDT), linux at prisktech.co.nz wrote:
> In arch/arm/common.gic.c:
> 
> static int gic_irq_domain_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int irq,
> urq_hw_number_t hw)
> {
> ...
>   irq_set_chip_and_handler(irq, &gic_chip, handle_fasteoi_irq);
>   set_irq_flags(irq, IRQF_VALID | IRQF_PROBE);
> }
> 
> but in arch/arm/mach-pxa/irq.c:
> 
> static int pxa_irq_map(struct irq_domain *d, unsigned int virq, urq_hw_number_t hw)
> {
> ...
>   irq_set_chip_and_handler(hw, &pxa_internal_irq_chip, handle_level_irq);
>   set_irq_flags(hw, IRQF_VALID);
> }
> 
> Is it correct to use irq/virq or hw for irq_set_chip_and_handler/set_irq_flags?
> 
> Both platforms are adding legacy domains, so while they both presumably work,
> one is slightly incorrect.

It should be irq. The mach-pxa code looks incorrect.

g.