Re: [PATCH 2/6] mfd: da9052: Introduce da9052-irq.c

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Thursday 04 October 2012, Mark Brown wrote:
> Aside from hiding the lookup of the irqdomian a bit there's a couple of
> reasons for existing devices having them:
> 
>  - With some devices like WM8994 the interrupts are optional so it's
>    useful to eat errors due to the interrupts not existing.  With the
>    ability to use linear domains this doesn't matter terribly much as we
>    can just allocate the interrupts even if there's no way they can
>    fire, it was more of an issue when irqdomain wasn't available.
> 
>  - With Arizona we've actually got a bunch of interrupt controllers the
>    interrupts might be allocated to and these functions allow us to hide
>    this mapping from the subdrivers.  This is pretty specialist though.
> 
> but if the interrupts are always requestable it really makes little
> odds, just a matter of taste.

Ok, thanks for the explanation. Since this was my only concern on this
version of the series:

Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/