On Friday 21 June 2013, Tomasz Figa wrote: > > To me, this new hook is strictly equivalent to init_irq. What do we gain > > exactly? I didn't think init_irq was going away... > > > > I know init_irq is not pretty, and we tend to overload it with other > > stuff, but I don't really see the point of adding a new callback that > > has the exact same properties. > > Well, it doesn't really give us any functional benefits. > > However in my opinion it looks much saner in case of DT-only platforms that > don't need any specific IRQ initialization, but need to call some platform > specific initialization routines, after memory management, but before > anything else is initialized. > > This way irqchip_init() doesn't have to be explicitly called in platform > code. > > Anyway, I don't have any strong opinion on this. If it is perfectly fine to > abuse irqchip_init() for anything that must be done at this stage of boot, > then I'm fine with this either and will modify the board file from further > patch from this series to not rely on this change any more. Your init_platform only has these two calls in it: + of_clk_init(NULL); + samsung_wdt_reset_of_init(); Presumably you need of_clk_init() for the watchdog to work. But do you actually need to initialize the reset logic this early? Why not turn samsung_wdt_reset_of_init into a standalone driver, or call it from init_machine? I would actually like to call of_clk_init from common code at some point between init_irq and init_time, although I'm not sure if some platforms need it to be called before init_irq. Arnd -- 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
 |