diff mbox

[11/14] ARM: ux500: remove irq_base property from platform_data

Message ID 1360093715-6348-12-git-send-email-linus.walleij@stericsson.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Linus Walleij Feb. 5, 2013, 7:48 p.m. UTC 
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>

AB8500 GPIO no longer handles its GPIO IRQs. Instead, the AB8500
core driver has taken back the responsibility. Prior to this
happening, the AB8500 GPIO driver provided a set of virtual IRQs
which were used as a pass-through. These virtual IRQs had a base
of MOP500_AB8500_VIR_GPIO_IRQ_BASE, which was passed though pdata.
We don't need to do this anymore, so we're pulling out the
property from the structure.

Cc: arm@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
---
Requesting an ACK from the ARM SoC maintainers on this patch.
---
 arch/arm/mach-ux500/board-mop500.c     | 1 -
 include/linux/mfd/abx500/ab8500-gpio.h | 1 -
 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)

Comments

Olof Johansson Feb. 10, 2013, 2:42 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 08:48:32PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> 
> AB8500 GPIO no longer handles its GPIO IRQs. Instead, the AB8500
> core driver has taken back the responsibility. Prior to this
> happening, the AB8500 GPIO driver provided a set of virtual IRQs
> which were used as a pass-through. These virtual IRQs had a base
> of MOP500_AB8500_VIR_GPIO_IRQ_BASE, which was passed though pdata.
> We don't need to do this anymore, so we're pulling out the
> property from the structure.
> 
> Cc: arm@kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> ---
> Requesting an ACK from the ARM SoC maintainers on this patch.

This patch on its own doesn't apply cleanly at all to arm-soc, I'm guessing
because I need the rest of the series. With the presumption that you're not
going to cause grief from sfr due to excessive conflicts. I.e. please try
merging with arm-soc for-next to see how bad it is:

patch 11-14:

Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>

If it's conflict-heavy, we'll stage a topic branch that we can both
pull in.  I'm guessing/hoping that won't be the case though.


-Olof
Linus Walleij Feb. 10, 2013, 3:01 p.m. UTC | #2 
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 3:42 AM, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote:

> This patch on its own doesn't apply cleanly at all to arm-soc, I'm guessing
> because I need the rest of the series. With the presumption that you're not
> going to cause grief from sfr due to excessive conflicts. I.e. please try
> merging with arm-soc for-next to see how bad it is:

OK, there were bad conflicts with two device tree patches.

So I'm going to take that stuff out and funnel through ARM SoC
instead.

I have a number of DT patches from Lee on a queues pull request
anyway, so I'll just stack these on top of that and then hopefully things
will fix themselves up.

> patch 11-14:
> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>

Thanks, I took only 11, 12 into the pinctrl tree. It's better off
like this.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/board-mop500.c b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/board-mop500.c
index b6f14ee..b8781ca 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/board-mop500.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/board-mop500.c
@@ -92,7 +92,6 @@  static struct platform_device snowball_gpio_en_3v3_regulator_dev = {
 
 static struct abx500_gpio_platform_data ab8500_gpio_pdata = {
 	.gpio_base		= MOP500_AB8500_PIN_GPIO(1),
-	.irq_base		= MOP500_AB8500_VIR_GPIO_IRQ_BASE,
 };
 
 /* ab8500-codec */
diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/abx500/ab8500-gpio.h b/include/linux/mfd/abx500/ab8500-gpio.h
index e8c8281..172b2f2 100644
--- a/include/linux/mfd/abx500/ab8500-gpio.h
+++ b/include/linux/mfd/abx500/ab8500-gpio.h
@@ -16,7 +16,6 @@ 
 
 struct abx500_gpio_platform_data {
 	int gpio_base;
-	u32 irq_base;
 };
 
 enum abx500_gpio_pull_updown {