22 Mar, 2012

1 commit

  • During DT adaptation, the irq_alloc_desc was added into twl-core, but
    due to the rather different and weird IRQ management required by the twl4030,
    it is much better to have a different approach for it.
    The issue is that twl4030 uses a two level IRQ mechanism but handles all the
    PWR interrupts as part of the twl-core interrupt range. It ends up with a
    range of 16 interrupts total for CORE and PWR.

    The other twl4030 functionalities already have a dedicated driver and thus
    their IRQs and irqdomain can and should be defined localy.

    twl6030 is using a single level IRQ controller and thus does not require any
    trick.

    Move the irq_alloc_desc and irq_domain_add_legacy in twl4030-irq and
    twl6030-irq.

    Allocate together CORE and PWR IRQs for twl4030-irq.

    Conflicts:

    drivers/mfd/twl-core.c

    Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson
    Acked-by: Felipe Balbi
    Signed-off-by: Samuel Ortiz

    Benoit Cousson
     

29 Oct, 2010

1 commit

  • Fixes following sparse warnings for twl4030 and twl6030 irq files.

    drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:783:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_irq' was not
    declared. Should it be static?
    drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:863:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_exit_irq' was not
    declared. Should it be static?
    drivers/mfd/twl4030-irq.c:873:5: warning: symbol 'twl4030_init_chip_irq' was
    not declared. Should it be static?

    drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:226:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_init_irq' was not
    declared. Should it be static?
    drivers/mfd/twl6030-irq.c:290:5: warning: symbol 'twl6030_exit_irq' was not
    declared. Should it be static?

    Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah
    Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
    Cc: Tony Lindgren
    Cc: Nishanth Menon
    Signed-off-by: Samuel Ortiz

    G, Manjunath Kondaiah