On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 20:49:46 +0100, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 9/27/21 12:43 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 2:28 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On 9/27/21 12:08 PM, Rob Herring wrote: > >>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:07 PM Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> In order to build drivers/irqchip/irq-bcm7120-l2.c as a module, we will > >>>> need to have of_irq_count() exported to modules. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@xxxxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> drivers/of/irq.c | 1 + > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >>>> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/of/irq.c b/drivers/of/irq.c > >>>> index 352e14b007e7..949b9d1f8729 100644 > >>>> --- a/drivers/of/irq.c > >>>> +++ b/drivers/of/irq.c > >>>> @@ -440,6 +440,7 @@ int of_irq_count(struct device_node *dev) > >>>> > >>>> return nr; > >>>> } > >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_irq_count); > >>> > >>> Please convert to use platform_irq_count() instead. > >> > >> That requires a platform_device to be passed to platform_irq_count(), > >> will that work even when the drivers remain built into the kernel and > >> get initialized early on? > > > > No, does your irqchip using this do both? Looks to me like it is > > always a platform_device. > > On ARM/ARM64 not using GKI as well as MIPS, we would want the module to > be built into the kernel image, however when using GKI that driver would > become a module. How do you suggest reconciling both usages? I don't see what GKI has to do with anything. Either the driver can be built as a module (and it is in this case a platform device at all times, built-in or not), or it cannot, and it falls into the IRQCHIP_DECLARE() category (and there is no export problem). Pick your poison! Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
