Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751308AbdCOMIR (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Mar 2017 08:08:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ot0-f194.google.com ([74.125.82.194]:35532 "EHLO mail-ot0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750780AbdCOMHc (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Mar 2017 08:07:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8760jbump6.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> References: <1473501690-11987-1-git-send-email-mpe@ellerman.id.au> <87wpbsuo4x.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> <8760jbump6.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 13:07:30 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: hu0dVGQ0FsVPhFgxwkM9eVDawPc Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/pcmcia: NO_IRQ removal for electra_cf.c To: Michael Ellerman Cc: linux-pcmcia@lists.infradead.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , oss@buserror.net, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Claudiu Manoil , qiang.zhao@nxp.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3671 Lines: 74 On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 6:35 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Arnd Bergmann writes: >> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: >>> Michael Ellerman writes: >>> >> >> drivers/ata/pata_mpc52xx.c: if (ata_irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c:#ifndef NO_IRQ >> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c:#define NO_IRQ 0 >> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c: if (hsdev->dma->irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c: if (irq != NO_IRQ) >> drivers/media/platform/fsl-viu.c: if (viu_irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/mtd/nand/mpc5121_nfc.c: if (prv->irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/pcmcia/electra_cf.c: cf->irq = NO_IRQ; >> drivers/pcmcia/electra_cf.c: if (cf->irq != NO_IRQ) >> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:/* Return an interrupt vector or NO_IRQ if >> no interrupt is pending. */ >> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c: return NO_IRQ; >> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:/* Return an interrupt vector or NO_IRQ if >> no interrupt is pending. */ >> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c: return NO_IRQ; >> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c: if (qe_ic->virq_low == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c: if (qe_ic->virq_high != NO_IRQ && >> drivers/spi/spi-mpc52xx.c: if (status && (irq != NO_IRQ)) >> drivers/tty/ehv_bytechan.c: if (stdout_irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/tty/ehv_bytechan.c: if ((bc->rx_irq == NO_IRQ) || >> (bc->tx_irq == NO_IRQ)) { >> drivers/tty/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_core.c: if (pinfo->port.irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c: if (irq != NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c: irq = NO_IRQ; >> drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c: irq != NO_IRQ ? irq : -1); >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-grlib.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/usb/host/ehci-ppc-of.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/usb/host/fhci-hcd.c: if (usb_irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/usb/host/ohci-ppc-of.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/usb/host/uhci-grlib.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/video/fbdev/mb862xx/mb862xxfbdrv.c: if (par->irq == NO_IRQ) { >> drivers/virt/fsl_hypervisor.c: if (!handle || (irq == NO_IRQ)) { >> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h: if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ) >> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h: if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ) >> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h: if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ) >> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h: if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ) >> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h: if (cascade_irq == NO_IRQ) >> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h: if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ) >> >> Did you have other pending patches for those? > > No. I stayed away from anything FSL related as I was under the > impression some of them were being ported to arch/arm, which uses -1 for > NO_IRQ IIUIC. > > eg. all of include/soc/fsl and drivers/soc/fsl was moved from > arch/powerpc in commit 7aa1aa6ecec2, which said: > > QE: Move QE from arch/powerpc to drivers/soc > > ls1 has qe and ls1 has arm cpu. > move qe from arch/powerpc to drivers/soc/fsl > to adapt to powerpc and arm > > But looking at the Kconfigs it looks like they're still only selectable > on PPC. So that's a bit annoying. > > I'll do patches for everything above that's not drivers/soc or > include/soc and hopefully we can hear from someone at NXP on the plans > for getting the soc parts enabled on arm. I think the removal of the NO_IRQ references is a requirement for getting the drivers working properly on ARM, as the OF platform code will use '0' for invalid IRQs. Arnd