[PATCH v10 01/11] irq: gic: support hip04 gic
mark.rutland at arm.com
Fri Jul 18 05:44:53 PDT 2014
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 01:05:26PM +0100, Jason Cooper wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 10:04:00AM +0800, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
> > There's a little difference between ARM GIC and HiP04 GIC.
> > * HiP04 GIC could support 16 cores at most, and ARM GIC could support
> > 8 cores at most. So the difination on GIC_DIST_TARGET registers are
> > different since CPU interfaces are increased from 8-bit to 16-bit.
> > * HiP04 GIC could support 510 interrupts at most, and ARM GIC could
> > support 1020 interrupts at most.
> > Signed-off-by: Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang at linaro.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/gic.txt | 1 +
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c | 141 +++++++++++++++++++-------
> > 2 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
> I need to apologize. This is my first full cycle maintaining irqchip
> and I'm still coming up to speed. The tl;dr is, I'm just not
> comfortable with the approach in this patch.
> If irq-gic.c was only used by one SoC, it'd be different, but in the
> scenario we have, I think it would be best if this were a separate
> driver, say irq-gic-hip04.c. You can link in irq-gic-common.o to get
> gic_dist_config(), and you'll be able to remove a lot of the static
> functions and conditionals.
A better approach might be to have some function pointers with each
compatible string, and then have associated with the HiP04 compatible
string, and then have those call common (inline) function variants. The
compiler can then deal with the different variants and we don't end up
with multiple GIC drivers getting out-of-sync.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel