> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-arm- > kernel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kukjin Kim > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:59 PM > To: 'Chanho Park'; ben-linux@xxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > linux-samsung-soc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: sachin.kamat@xxxxxxxxxx; will.deacon@xxxxxxx; > kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx; linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > thomas.abraham@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 2/5] ARM: EXYNOS: Correct combined IRQs for > exynos4 > > Chanho Park wrote: > > > > This patch corrects combined IRQs for exynos4 series platform. The > > exynos4412 > > has four extra combined irq group and the exynos4212 has two more > > combined irqs than exynos4210. Each irq is mapped to IRQ_SPI(xx). > > Unfortunately, extra 4 combined IRQs isn't sequential. So, we need to > > map the irqs manually. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chanho Park <chanho61.park@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c | 42 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > - > > arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/irqs.h | 4 ++- > > 2 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c > > b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c index 709245e..fdd582a 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/common.c > > @@ -560,23 +560,50 @@ static struct irq_domain_ops > > combiner_irq_domain_ops = { > > .map = combiner_irq_domain_map, > > }; > > > > +static unsigned int combiner_extra_irq(int group) > > This is only for exynos4212 and exynos4412 so how about to use > exynos4x12_combiner_extra_irq()? I agree with you. I'll change it in next patchset. > > > +{ > > + switch (group) { > > + case 16: > > + return IRQ_SPI(107); > > + case 17: > > + return IRQ_SPI(108); > > + case 18: > > + return IRQ_SPI(48); > > + case 19: > > + return IRQ_SPI(42); > > + default: > > + return 0; > > + } > > +} > > + > > +static unsigned int max_combiner_nr(void) { > > + if (soc_is_exynos5250()) > > + return EXYNOS5_MAX_COMBINER_NR; > > + else if (soc_is_exynos4412()) > > + return EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR; > > EXYNOS4412_MAX_COMBINER_NR is more clear? EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR is defined for MAX_COMBINER_NR which determines maximum combined irq number. In this situation, EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR is more clear than EXYNOS4412_xx. How about this? I think it's more clearer in all cases. -#define EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR 16 +#define EXYNOS4210_MAX_COMBINER_NR 16 +#define EXYNOS4212_MAX_COMBINER_NR 18 +#define EXYNOS4412_MAX_COMBINER_NR 20 +#define EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR EXYNOS4412_MAX_COMBINER_NR > > > + else if (soc_is_exynos4212()) > > + return EXYNOS4212_MAX_COMBINER_NR; > > + else > > + return EXYNOS4210_MAX_COMBINER_NR; > > +} > > + > > static void __init combiner_init(void __iomem *combiner_base, > > struct device_node *np) > > { > > int i, irq, irq_base; > > unsigned int max_nr, nr_irq; > > > > + max_nr = max_combiner_nr(); > > + > > if (np) { > > if (of_property_read_u32(np, "samsung,combiner-nr", > &max_nr)) > > { > > pr_warning("%s: number of combiners not specified, > " > > Hmm...the message should be changed, because it is just defined by > checking SoC with this changes not property of device tree...So how about > just using > pr_info() with proper message? I agree with you. I'll fix it. > > > "setting default as %d.\n", > > - __func__, EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR); > > - max_nr = EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR; > > + __func__, max_nr); > > } > > - } else { > > - max_nr = soc_is_exynos5250() ? > EXYNOS5_MAX_COMBINER_NR : > > - > EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR; > > } > > + > > nr_irq = max_nr * MAX_IRQ_IN_COMBINER; > > > > irq_base = irq_alloc_descs(COMBINER_IRQ(0, 0), 1, nr_irq, 0); @@ > > -593,7 +620,10 @@ static void __init combiner_init(void __iomem > > *combiner_base, > > } > > > > for (i = 0; i < max_nr; i++) { > > - irq = IRQ_SPI(i); > > + if (i < EXYNOS4210_MAX_COMBINER_NR || > soc_is_exynos5250()) > > + irq = IRQ_SPI(i); > > + else > > + irq = combiner_extra_irq(i); > > #ifdef CONFIG_OF > > if (np) > > irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(np, i); diff --git > > a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/irqs.h b/arch/arm/mach- > > exynos/include/mach/irqs.h index 35bced6..3a83546 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/irqs.h > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/include/mach/irqs.h > > @@ -165,7 +165,9 @@ > > #define EXYNOS4_IRQ_FIMD0_VSYNC COMBINER_IRQ(11, 1) > > #define EXYNOS4_IRQ_FIMD0_SYSTEM COMBINER_IRQ(11, 2) > > > > -#define EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR 16 > > +#define EXYNOS4210_MAX_COMBINER_NR 16 > > +#define EXYNOS4212_MAX_COMBINER_NR 18 > > +#define EXYNOS4_MAX_COMBINER_NR 20 > > EXYNOS4412_MAX_COMBINER_NR ? > > > > > #define EXYNOS4_IRQ_GPIO1_NR_GROUPS 16 > > #define EXYNOS4_IRQ_GPIO2_NR_GROUPS 9 > > -- > > 1.7.9.5 > > > > Thanks. > > Best regards, > Kgene. > -- > Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Senior Engineer, SW Solution > Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |