On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:47:35AM +0000, Jamie Iles wrote: > On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 11:41:47AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > The issue stems from the fact that we have to route the PMU interrupts to > > the correct CPU manually (I think only MSM routes them as PPIs, which is > > clearly the correct thing to do). To do this, we expect the IRQ resources to > > be laid out in CPU order. In hindsight, maybe naming the resources might > > have been a good idea, but them we'd still have to generate the names using > > CPU numbers when iterating through the platform device. > > There isn't yet a way to do naming of resources with DT, and although I > think there was a proposal for doing named register resources I don't > think this has been accepted and there wasn't anything for IRQ > resources... That's good news - means I have an excuse other than laziness for not implementing this for perf :) Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
