Dne 19. 05. 19 v 23:45 Hauke Mehrtens napsal(a):
>
> Have you seen such feature in any other upstream IRQ driver?
> This automatic assignment of IRQs to VPEs looks a little bit strange to
> me, but I am also not an expter on IRQs.
>
Yes loongson64 has it in ht_irqdispatch():
https://elixir.boot
Hi Petr,
Thank you for the patch.
On 5/17/19 5:44 AM, Petr Cvek wrote:
> Some lantiq SoCs have multiple VPE support but no support for the IRQ
> routing, so only the first VPE is receiving interrupts. This patch adds
> support for rerouting interrupts to the other VPE. Basically it expands
> the
Hi everyone, I am not sure if I need to reply to both emails but I shall do so
anyway.
Regarding the patches, I am using it already for my 2 routers, namely TPLink
TD-W8980 and HomeHub 5A and at the time when these patches were first
introduced there were considerable improvements in LAN and Wi
Dne 17. 05. 19 v 12:24 Petr Štetiar napsal(a):
> Petr Cvek [2019-05-17 05:44:35]:
>
> Hi,
Hi,
>
>> +--- a/arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c2019-03-10 20:44:58.755134326 +0100
>> b/arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c2019-05-17 05:13:50.302149058 +0200
>
> is there any particular reason this shoul
Petr Cvek [2019-05-17 05:44:35]:
Hi,
> +--- a/arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c 2019-03-10 20:44:58.755134326 +0100
> b/arch/mips/lantiq/irq.c 2019-05-17 05:13:50.302149058 +0200
is there any particular reason this shouldn't go through upstream first?
BTW I'm wondering how to handle your 4 other RFC
Some lantiq SoCs have multiple VPE support but no support for the IRQ
routing, so only the first VPE is receiving interrupts. This patch adds
support for rerouting interrupts to the other VPE. Basically it expands
the current ICU driver for the second controller, adds new address
ranges to the devi
