Hi Lee, Arnd, On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 01:57:27PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 07 September 2012, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 01:37:26PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 07 September 2012, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:35:41PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > > > > The examples I had seen before were all just ranges of two interrupts, > > > and in those cases it was clear that splitting them would be best. > > > > > > In the exampled of the ab8500-gpio driver, it looks like the resource is > > > not actually being used, and the gpio driver implements its own irq_chip, > > > so maybe we can get away with not solving this problem for now. > > > > Understood. I'd still feel more comfortable if we didn't trash the > > range. I think it would be best to show the warning, and leave the > > range for its target driver to take care - hence the patch. > > > > ... but it's your call. > > I'm fine with whatever Samuel sees fit here. My personal opinion is > that leaving the range alone for the child driver to do the conversion > would be too inconsistent and only lead to confusion with driver authors. Although I agree modifying the range is not very nice from the MFD core, I also think that the actual mapping should always be handled by MFD and not depend on wether the range is a singleton or not. Moreover the semantics of leaving the range untouched meaning that we haven't done the mappings is obscure. So I'm not taking this patch, sorry Lee.
Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
