On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 2:59 PM Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 10/03/2022 14:14, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 4:42 AM Srinivas Kandagatla > > <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 10/03/2022 10:23, Lad, Prabhakar wrote: > >>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:16 AM Srinivas Kandagatla > >>> <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 24/12/2021 16:13, Lad Prabhakar wrote: > >>>>> platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, ..) relies on static > >>>>> allocation of IRQ resources in DT core code, this causes an issue > >>>> > >>>> Are you saying that we should not be using platform_get_resource(pdev, > >>>> IORESOURCE_IRQ, ...) on drivers that support DT? > > > > We should be using platform_get_irq(). (period, on all platform drivers) > > > > Thanks, I see why is it preferred. > > Code as of now will not prevent drivers from calling > platform_get_resource(..IORESOURCE_IRQ). > > Are we planning to enforce this in any way? > > >>>>> when using hierarchical interrupt domains using "interrupts" property > >>>>> in the node as this bypasses the hierarchical setup and messes up the > >>>>> irq chaining. > >>>> > >>>> Should this not be fixed in the DT core itself? > >>>> > >>> Yes the plan is to fix in the DT core itself (refer [0]). > >>> > >>> [0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-renesas-soc/patch/20211209001056.29774-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> In preparation for removal of static setup of IRQ resource from DT core > >>>>> code use platform_get_irq(). > >>>> > >>>> I would prefer this patch to be part of the series that removes IRQ > >>>> resource handling from DT core. > >>>> > >>> Since there are too many users (which are in different subsystems) > >>> getting this all in single series would be a pain. As a result it is > >>> split up into individual subsystems. > >> Am happy for this to be included in that series, > >> TBH, this patch make more sense along with that series than by itself. > > > > No it doesn't. This is no different than converting to devm_* variants > > or other cleanups to match current preferred styles. > > > > Treewide cross subsystem clean-ups are a huge pain to merge. Why would > > you ask for that when it is clearly not necessary? > > Only reason for this ask was to understand how platform_get_resource() > will change moving forward, if this is something that you are planning > to include in your fix patches. > > I can go ahead and apply the patch, if that helps. > Yes please, that would be helpful. Cheers, Prabhakar
