On Thursday 02 May 2013, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > > Just look at the various implementations in drivers/irqchip/ and find > > out how similar they are. Moving code to drivers/irqchip/ does not > > make an excuse for reestablishing the mess which was addressed by the > > generic irq chip implementation. > > > > Can you - and that means all of you ARM folks - please get your gear > > together and add the missing features to the generic irq chip > > implementation? I'm not going to accept more of that OF/DT frenzy. > > So you are suggesting to have a "linux,generic-intc" or you want me > to have "marvell,orion-intc" make use of generic irq chip again? > > The second is easy, the first will take me a while to think about > proper DT properties how to encode mask/unmask/ack/.. availability > and offsets. I think it should not be "linux,..." since the description can well be OS independent. I don't have a good idea for a generic name, but it's not very important. The main missing piece in the generic irqchip code at the moment is support for the linear irqdomain. Once we have that, a lot of code can be simplified significantly. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
