[PATCH v2 4/4] irqchip: gic: Perform the gic_secondary_init() call via CPU notifier

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Catalin Marinas wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:35:46PM +0000, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > 
> > > All the calls to gic_secondary_init() pass 0 as the first argument.
> > > Since this function is called on each CPU when starting, it can be done
> > > in a platform-independent way via a CPU notifier registered by the GIC
> > > code.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas at arm.com>
> > > Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren at nvidia.com>
> > > Acked-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar at linaro.org>
> > > Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar at ti.com>
> > > Acked-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring at calxeda.com>
> > > Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas at verge.net.au>
> > > Tested-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas at verge.net.au>
> > > Acked-by: Srinidhi Kasagar <srinidhi.kasagar at stericsson.com>
> > > Cc: Russell King <linux at arm.linux.org.uk>
> > > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix.de>
> > > Cc: Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim at samsung.com>
> > > Cc: Sascha Hauer <kernel at pengutronix.de>
> > > Cc: David Brown <davidb at codeaurora.org>
> > > Cc: Bryan Huntsman <bryanh at codeaurora.org>
> > > Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony at atomide.com>
> > > Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm at gmail.com>
> > > Cc: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen at altera.com>
> > > Cc: Shiraz Hashim <shiraz.hashim at st.com>
> > > Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij at linaro.org>
> > 
> > Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico at linaro.org>
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > What is your plan in terms of merge path and schedule?  My mcpm series
> > would depend on this.
> 
> I would like to get them in as soon as possible (ideally 3.9) as AArch64
> needs GIC support. I can base them on Rob's branch (already in -next)
> and send them the same route (the arm-soc tree if Olof/Arnd are ok to
> take them).

Well...  I'd prefer if my series was merged by RMK since this is mostly 
core ARM code.  That is posing dependency issues.

I think I'll just ignore your change for now and we'll fix things up 
during the v3.9-rc period.


Nicolas