Re: [PATCH] drivers/pcmcia: NO_IRQ removal for electra_cf.c

[Michael Ellerman]

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> We'd like to eventually remove NO_IRQ on powerpc, so remove usages of it
>>> from electra_cf.c which is a powerpc-only driver.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/pcmcia/electra_cf.c | 4 ++--
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> Ping anyone?
>>
>> Or should I merge this via the powerpc tree?
>
> That's what I would recommend for a powerpc specific pcmcia driver, yes.

Suits me.

> Looking at the bigger picture of powerpc drivers using NO_IRQ, I also
> see these others:
>
> drivers/ata/pata_mpc52xx.c:     if (ata_irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c:#ifndef NO_IRQ
> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c:#define NO_IRQ             0
> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c:   if (hsdev->dma->irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c:   if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c:       if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/iommu/fsl_pamu.c:       if (irq != NO_IRQ)
> drivers/media/platform/fsl-viu.c:       if (viu_irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/mtd/nand/mpc5121_nfc.c: if (prv->irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/pcmcia/electra_cf.c:    cf->irq = NO_IRQ;
> drivers/pcmcia/electra_cf.c:    if (cf->irq != NO_IRQ)
> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:/* Return an interrupt vector or NO_IRQ if
> no interrupt is pending. */
> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:             return NO_IRQ;
> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:/* Return an interrupt vector or NO_IRQ if
> no interrupt is pending. */
> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:             return NO_IRQ;
> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:     if (qe_ic->virq_low == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.c:     if (qe_ic->virq_high != NO_IRQ &&
> drivers/spi/spi-mpc52xx.c:      if (status && (irq != NO_IRQ))
> drivers/tty/ehv_bytechan.c:     if (stdout_irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/tty/ehv_bytechan.c:     if ((bc->rx_irq == NO_IRQ) ||
> (bc->tx_irq == NO_IRQ)) {
> drivers/tty/serial/cpm_uart/cpm_uart_core.c:    if (pinfo->port.irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c:        if (irq != NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c:                        irq = NO_IRQ;
> drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c:                 irq != NO_IRQ ? irq : -1);
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-grlib.c:  if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-ppc-of.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/usb/host/fhci-hcd.c:    if (usb_irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/usb/host/ohci-ppc-of.c: if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/usb/host/uhci-grlib.c:  if (irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/video/fbdev/mb862xx/mb862xxfbdrv.c:     if (par->irq == NO_IRQ) {
> drivers/virt/fsl_hypervisor.c:          if (!handle || (irq == NO_IRQ)) {
> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h:     if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ)
> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h:     if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ)
> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h:     if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ)
> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h:     if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ)
> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h:     if (cascade_irq == NO_IRQ)
> include/soc/fsl/qe/qe_ic.h:     if (cascade_irq != NO_IRQ)
>
> Did you have other pending patches for those?

No. I stayed away from anything FSL related as I was under the
impression some of them were being ported to arch/arm, which uses -1 for
NO_IRQ IIUIC.

eg. all of include/soc/fsl and drivers/soc/fsl was moved from
arch/powerpc in commit 7aa1aa6ecec2, which said:

    QE: Move QE from arch/powerpc to drivers/soc
    
    ls1 has qe and ls1 has arm cpu.
    move qe from arch/powerpc to drivers/soc/fsl
    to adapt to powerpc and arm

But looking at the Kconfigs it looks like they're still only selectable
on PPC. So that's a bit annoying.

I'll do patches for everything above that's not drivers/soc or
include/soc and hopefully we can hear from someone at NXP on the plans
for getting the soc parts enabled on arm.

cheers