Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2016 08:22:52 -0600 From: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> To: Andrew Turner <andrew@fubar.geek.nz>, Svatopluk Kraus <skra@FreeBSD.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r301266 - head/sys/arm/freescale/imx Message-ID: <1464963772.1204.195.camel@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20160603134031.7a038244@zapp> References: <201606031105.u53B5tVi073576@repo.freebsd.org> <20160603134031.7a038244@zapp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 2016-06-03 at 13:40 +0100, Andrew Turner wrote: > On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 11:05:55 +0000 (UTC) > Svatopluk Kraus <skra@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > > Author: skra > > Date: Fri Jun 3 11:05:55 2016 > > New Revision: 301266 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/301266 > > > > Log: > > Postpone allocation of IRQ resource to the time when interrupt > > controller devices are attached. This has already been done for > > bus_setup_intr(). > > > > There was no doubt that if someone wants to setup an interrupt, > > corresponding interrupt controller device must already be > > attached. > > However, the same must be valid for allocation of an interrupt > > resource unless the allocation is done blindly, without any > > information that such interrupt even exists. While it was done this > > blind way before, it won't be possible after next INTRNG change. > > > > Modified: > > head/sys/arm/freescale/imx/imx6_anatop.c > > > > Modified: head/sys/arm/freescale/imx/imx6_anatop.c > > =================================================================== > > =========== > > --- head/sys/arm/freescale/imx/imx6_anatop.c Fri Jun 3 > > 10:28:06 2016 (r301265) +++ > > head/sys/arm/freescale/imx/imx6_anatop.c Fri Jun 3 11:05:55 > > 2016 (r301266) @@ -78,7 +78,6 @@ __FBSDID("$FreeBSD$"); > > static struct resource_spec imx6_anatop_spec[] = { > > { SYS_RES_MEMORY, 0, RF_ACTIVE }, > > - { SYS_RES_IRQ, 0, RF_ACTIVE }, > > Why not mark it as optional? No point, really. The anatop driver attaches at BUS_PASS_BUS, way before interrupt controllers, so it's not like attach-time allocation will ever work, optional or not. (It's not a bus, it's a driver for regulators and some cpu/soc control stuff that almost every other driver will need, but we don't have a named bus pass early enough for that, other than _BUS). -- Ian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1464963772.1204.195.camel>