Hi Benoit,
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:07 PM, DebBarma, Tarun Kanti
<tarun.kanti@xxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Cousson, Benoit <b-cousson@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> + Tarun
>>
>>
>> On 2/24/2012 12:08 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>>>
>>> * Cousson, Benoit<b-cousson@xxxxxx> [120223 14:14]:
>>>>
>>>> The GPIO driver is still relying on internal OMAP IRQ defines that
>>>> are not relevant anymore if OMAP is built with SPARSE_IRQ.
>>>
>>>
>>> Great :)
>>>
>>>> Please note that this patch is still RFC, because I do not know
>>>> how to fix properly the ugly cpu_class_is_omap1 and the dependency
>>>> with IH_MPUIO_BASE to detect a MPUIO.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like gpio_to_irq() needs to be set in the
>>> arch/arm/*omap*/gpio*.c then.
>>
>>
>> In fact, after a second thought, that might even work for OMAP1 because I'm
>> using the proper base (IRQ and GPIO) to convert the IRQ number.
>>
>>
>> static int irq_to_gpio(struct gpio_bank *bank, unsigned int gpio_irq)
>> {
>>
>> return gpio_irq - bank->irq_base + bank->chip.base;
>> }
>>
>> But it might be good to test it on OMAP1 platform.
>>
>>
>> Tarun,
>>
>> Do you have an OMAP1 board to test that.
> Yes, I will test on OMAP1 board.
I have booted the image on OMAP1 with following change.
I guess bank->irq_base was a typo?
static int irq_to_gpio(struct gpio_bank *bank, unsigned int gpio_irq)
{
//return gpio_irq - bank->irq_base + bank->chip.base;
return gpio_irq - bank->virtual_irq_start + bank->chip.base;
}
--
Tarun
--
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
