On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 8:04 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > * Grant Likely <grant.likely@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [130624 09:00]: >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > * Javier Martinez Canillas <martinez.javier@xxxxxxxxx> [130623 18:08]: >> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:43 AM, Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@xxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 01:06:37AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@xxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> > What is the status of this patch? We're already at 3.10-rc7 and GPIO >> >> >> > IRQs are still broken on OMAP1. >> >> > >> >> > [...] >> >> > >> >> >> There is a problem with this patch. >> >> > >> >> > [...] >> >> > >> >> >> So I think that the correct solution is to add SPARSE_IRQ support to >> >> >> omap1 and not reverting Jon's patch. Of course this may not be >> >> >> possible since we are so close to 3.10 and most OMAP patches already >> >> >> merged for 3.11 but we should definitely try to have this at least for >> >> >> 3.12. Otherwise we won't be able to move to DT-only booting for >> >> >> OMAP2+. >> >> > >> >> > OMAP1 does not use DT. So we could put this code under #ifdef >> >> > CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP1 or similar. It's just a few lines of code. OMAP2+ >> >> > work should not regress OMAP1. >> >> > >> >> > Demanding SPARSE_IRQ support for OMAP1 should have been discussed before >> >> > these changes were made. It's not reasonable to assume such things can >> >> > be made during rc-cycle. Also, now, I don't think it's reasonable to >> >> > wait for that to be done, as it would take until 3.12 or even later to >> >> > get OMAP1 functional again. >> >> > >> >> > A. >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Yes, since we are so late in the -rc cycle and OMAP1 is currently >> >> broken I agree that the only sensible solution is to revert the patch >> >> for now. >> > >> > Agreed. >> > >> >> I just wanted to point out the issue that keeping the OMAP GPIO driver >> >> using legacy mapping domain represents a blocker to have GPIO-IRQ >> >> working with Device Tree for OMAP2+ >> > >> > Yes. We can do the ifdef Aaro suggested, and let's also plan on >> > converting omap1 to use SPARSE_IRQ. But with the ifdef we can cut >> > away the dependency between these two. >> >> Alright. Sorry I dropped the ball on this one. I've lost track of >> which patch needs to get applied, but given that it is so late in the >> cycle, it would be better for someone else to apply the change, test >> and send a pull request to Linus. I'm okay with it going through the >> OMAP tree if that is the most expedient. Alternately, send me the pull >> request and I'll pass it on to Linus. > > OK, I'll wait for Aaro's ack on Javier's patch and then put it into a > branch for you. Thanks Tony. g. -- 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
