On 11/11/2011 07:50 PM, email@example.com wrote:
> From: David Daney <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> This is the first cut at hooking up my Octeon port to the irq_domain things.
> The Octeon specific patches are part of a larger set, and will need to
> be applied with that set, the first patch is stand-alone.
> The basic problem being solved taken from one of my other e-mails:
> Unfortunately, although a good idea, kernel/irq/irqdomain.c makes a
> bunch of assumptions that don't hold for Octeon. We may be able to
> improve it so that it flexible enough to suit us.
> Here are the problems I see:
> 1) It is assumed that there is some sort of linear correspondence
> between 'hwirq' and 'irq', and that the range of valid values is
> 2) It is assumed that the concepts of nr_irq, irq_base and
> hwirq_base have easy to determine values and you can do iteration
> over their ranges by adding indexes to the bases.
I still think this is the wrong approach.
Are the gpio interrupts the source of your problem here? That's how I
read it. You have 16 GPIO irqs directly connected into lines on your
primary interrupt controller which has 128 lines. So for a Linux irq
number, you want to translate to a GPIO hwirq number and/or a CIU hwirq
number. Trying to have 2 hwirq mappings for 1 Linux irq number just
won't work. It seems to me you should use a chained handler here because
you need to process the interrupt at both the primary ctrlr and gpio
> David Daney (2):
> irq/of/ARM: Enhance irq iteration capability of irq_domain code.
> MIPS: Octeon: Add irq_create_of_mapping() and GPIO interrupts.
> arch/arm/common/gic.c | 32 +++--
> arch/mips/Kconfig | 1 +
> arch/mips/cavium-octeon/octeon-irq.c | 279
> include/linux/irqdomain.h | 29 +++-
> kernel/irq/irqdomain.c | 97 +++++++++---
> 5 files changed, 390 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)