On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Scott Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:24:35AM -0400, Jon Smirl wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Anton Vorontsov >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > Assume that GPIO 8 does not translate to any IRQ, but IRQ 8 is still >> > valid virq b/c it is mapped for another IRQ controller (particularly >> > lots of kernel code assumes that IRQ 8 is 8259 PIC's CMOS interrupt, >> > the PIC and IRQ8 is widely used on PowerPC). >> >> Set the base in the GPIO struct such that this won't happen. You can >> set the base greater than MAX_IRQ. > > And then you'll conflict with some other subsystem that decides to engage > in the same shenanigans.
That comment was target at GPIO's that don't support interrupts. Give those GPIO numbers greater than MAX_IRQ in case someone tries to use them with the IRQ subsystem. Then they'll get errors. > Just allocate a chunk of virq space like any other cascaded IRQ > controller. That is what I did. > > -Scott > -- Jon Smirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
