On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 09:04:16AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Simon, > > On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 1:13 AM, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 11:57:15AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> This patch series corrects the masks in the second interrupt cells for > >> Private Peripheral Interrupts in dtsi files for the shmobile family of > >> SoCs. > >> > >> It's my understanding this mask should reflect the actual number of CPU > >> cores the interrupt is wired too. > >> Is that correct? > >> > >> - Hence it should be "GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(2)" on dual-core CPUs, like > >> r8a7791 and r8a7794 (the first two patches), > >> - Should it be "GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(8)" on big.LITTLE configurations > >> with four Cortex-A15 cores and four Cortex-A7 cores? > >> Or should the interrupts be delivered to the four Cortex-A15 cores > >> only by default? > >> The last two RFC-patches implement the former for r8a7790 and > >> r8a73a4. > >> > >> Note that incorrect masks for GIC PPI interrupts are not limited to > >> shmobile. Presumably the interrupt specifiers got copied around a lot, > >> cfr. the proliferation of "GIC_CPU_MASK_SIMPLE(4)" (and the older > >> hardcoded "0xf0x" variant) in various dtsi files, not always limited to > >> quad-core CPUs. > >> > >> This was tested on r8a7791/koelsch, which uses the arch timer interrupt. > >> > >> Thanks for your feedback! > >> > >> Geert Uytterhoeven (4): > >> ARM: shmobile: r8a7791: Correct mask for GIC PPI interrupts > >> ARM: shmobile: r8a7794: Correct mask for GIC PPI interrupts > > > > Hi Geert, > > > > the above two patches seem like they could be queued up. > > Shall I do so? > > I think it's safe. Thanks! Thanks, I have done so. -- 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
