On 12/11/13 13:30, Courtney Cavin wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 12:35:22AM +0100, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> @@ -282,17 +278,14 @@ static struct irq_chip pm8xxx_irq_chip = {
>> * RETURNS:
>> * an int indicating the value read on that line
>> */
>> -int pm8xxx_get_irq_stat(struct pm_irq_chip *chip, int irq)
>> +static int pm8xxx_get_irq_stat(struct pm_irq_chip *chip, int irq)
>> {
>> int pmirq, rc;
>> u8 block, bits, bit;
>> unsigned long flags;
>> + struct irq_data *irq_data = irq_get_irq_data(irq);
>>
>> - if (chip == NULL || irq < chip->irq_base ||
>> - irq >= chip->irq_base + chip->num_irqs)
>> - return -EINVAL;
>> -
>> - pmirq = irq - chip->irq_base;
>> + pmirq = irq_data->hwirq;
>>
>> block = pmirq / 8;
>> bit = pmirq % 8;
>> @@ -322,64 +315,55 @@ bail_out:
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pm8xxx_get_irq_stat);
> Surely this isn't needed anymore, since the function is now static.
Sure. Deleted.
>
> [...]
>> +static int pm8xxx_irq_init(struct platform_device *pdev, unsigned int irq,
>> + unsigned int nirqs)
> 'nirqs' seems to always be 256. Is there a benefit to keeping this
> dynamic?
I was future coding. Some pmics have less than 256 interrupts. I'll just
hardcode it for now and if/when we support the other pmics we can make
it a parameter.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
