Hi Vinod,
On 7/24/2016 2:42 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 12:09:37AM +0530, Sinan Kaya wrote:
>
>> @@ -567,6 +578,98 @@ static int hidma_create_sysfs_entry(struct hidma_dev *dev, char *name,
>> return device_create_file(dev->ddev.dev, attrs);
>> }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_MSI_IRQ_DOMAIN
>
> This can be true on machine with your older HW, so I would be bit more
> careful here..
Correct, I tested the patch with new and old HW. The old HW won't attempt calling this function
since msi flag will be false.
>
>> + if (rc)
>> + dev_warn(&pdev->dev,
>> + "failed to request MSI irq, falling back to wired IRQ\n");
>> + return rc;
>> +#else
>> + return -EINVAL;
>
> -EINVAL doesnt sound apt here..
What should I use? -ENOENT ?
>
>> + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(dev);
>> + const char *of_compat;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + if (!adev || acpi_disabled) {
>> + ret = device_property_read_string(dev, "compatible",
>> + &of_compat);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return false;
>> +
>> + ret = strcmp(of_compat, "qcom,hidma-1.1");
>> + } else {
>> + ret = strcmp(acpi_device_hid(adev), "QCOM8062");
>
> Okay if you ahve a device ID then why do we need new binding? This device as
> you said implies the support for MSI interrupts.
Yes, I do have a new device ID for platforms with MSI capability.
Which new binding are you referring to?
>
> Thanks
>
Sinan
--
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
