[PATCH v2 03/10] mfd: twl-core: Add initial DT support for twl4030/twl6030
Cousson, Benoit
b-cousson at ti.com
Thu Jan 5 21:21:21 EST 2012
Hi Grant,
On 1/4/2012 7:12 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 03:02:34PM +0100, Benoit Cousson wrote:
[...]
>> @@ -1183,22 +1187,53 @@ twl_probe(struct i2c_client *client, const struct i2c_device_id *id)
>> int status;
>> unsigned i;
>> struct twl4030_platform_data *pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
>> + struct device_node *node = client->dev.of_node;
>> u8 temp;
>> int ret = 0;
>>
>> + if (node&& !pdata) {
>> + /*
>> + * XXX: Temporary fake pdata until the information
>> + * is correctly retrieved by every TWL modules from DT.
>> + */
>> + pdata = kzalloc(sizeof(struct twl4030_platform_data),
>> + GFP_KERNEL);
>
> devm_kzalloc() so that it gets cleaned up on remove.
Yep, it was already updated like that in the v4.
>> + if (!pdata) {
>> + status = -ENOMEM;
>> + goto exit;
>> + }
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * XXX: For the moment the IRQs for TWL seems to be encoded in
>> + * the global OMAP space. That should be cleaned to allow
>> + * dynamically adding a new IRQ controller.
>> + */
>> + if ((id->driver_data)& TWL6030_CLASS) {
>> + pdata->irq_base = TWL6030_IRQ_BASE;
>> + pdata->irq_end = pdata->irq_base + TWL6030_BASE_NR_IRQS;
>> + } else {
>> + pdata->irq_base = TWL4030_IRQ_BASE;
>> + pdata->irq_end = pdata->irq_base + TWL4030_BASE_NR_IRQS;
>> + }
>> + irq_domain_add_simple(node, pdata->irq_base);
>
> Yes, you'll want a follow-up patch to convert to dynamically allocated
> irqs... but I've got to merge the final irq_domain work first. :-)
Yes. I already have a version based on Rob's series, but did not push it
since Rob was not confident with the merge of that feature for 3.3.
> Acked-by: Grant Likely<grant.likely at secretlab.ca>
Thanks,
Benoit
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list