The subject is completely misleading. Make it clear what the scope of this patch is.
On 03/13/2013 06:26 AM, Vikas Sajjan wrote:
The FIMD driver expects the "vsync" interrupt to be mentioned as the 1st parameter in the FIMD DT node. So to meet this expectation of the driver, the FIMD DT node was forced to be made by keeping "vsync" as the 1st parameter.
this resolves the above mentioned "hack" by introducing "interrupt-names", so that FIMD driver can get the interrupt resource by name as discussed at http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org/msg16211.html
I fail to see what the hack is. The order of interrupt properties must be defined by the binding. interrupt-names is auxiliary data and must not be required by an OS.
patch is dependent on https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2184981/
Why the split? These should be combined.
Signed-off-by: Vikas Sajjan vikas.sajjan@linaro.org
arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi index 0ee4706..76c8911 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250.dtsi @@ -588,6 +588,7 @@ compatible = "samsung,exynos5-fimd"; interrupt-parent = <&combiner>; reg = <0x14400000 0x40000>;
interrupts = <18 5>, <18 4>, <18 6>;
interrupt-names = "fifo", "vsync", "lcd_sys";interrupts = <18 4>, <18 5>, <18 6>;
There should be some documentation describing the order of the interrupts.
Rob