Re: [PATCH 2/2] irqchip: add support for Sigma Designs SMP86xx interrupt controller

[Måns Rullgård]

Mason <slash.tmp@xxxxxxx> writes:

> On 25/11/2015 13:12, Måns Rullgård wrote:
>
>> Mason writes:
>> 
>>>> +	status_lo = intc_readl(chip, chip->ctl + IRQ_STATUS);
>>>> +	status_hi = intc_readl(chip, chip->ctl + IRQ_CTL_HI + IRQ_STATUS);
>>>
>>> In my local branch, I wrote:
>>>
>>> #define IRQ_CTL_LO	0
>>>
>>> 	status_lo = intc_readl(chip, chip->ctl + IRQ_CTL_LO + IRQ_STATUS);
>>> 	status_hi = intc_readl(chip, chip->ctl + IRQ_CTL_HI + IRQ_STATUS);
>>>
>>> (I'm a sucker for symmetry)
>> 
>> Nothing wrong with a little symmetry, though in this case I think the
>> extra macro only confuses matters.
>
> It's your call :-)
>
> In my mind, the fact that the status_lo register sits at offset 0 is
> just an accident. It's just that something has to sit at offset 0.
> (Maybe I should tell the HW guys to put nothing at offset 0, and start
> the actual register block at offset 4. /That/ would be unexpected.)
>
> Another way to look at it is:
>
> There are two 4-register blocks (LO and HI) each containing registers
> {status,rawstat,enableset,enableclr}.
>
> Block LO starts at offset 0x0
> Block HI starts at offset 0x18
>
> and then there are the intra offsets for the 4 registers in the block.

When I wrote it, I was thinking of IRQ_CTL_HI as the offset to add to a
low register to get the corresponding high one.  I think that's what you
said there.

-- 
Måns Rullgård
mans@xxxxxxxxx
--
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/