SUN4I_IRQ_VECTOR_REG containing 0 can mean one of 3 things:
1) no more irqs pending
2) irq 0 pending
3) spurious irq
So if we immediately get a reading of 0, check the irq-pending reg
to differentiate between 2 and 3. We only do this once to avoid
the extra check in the common case of 1) hapening after having
read the vector-reg once.
Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1394733834-26839-3-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
The Allwinner A10 compatibles were following a slightly different compatible
patterns than the rest of the SoCs for historical reasons. Change the compatibles
to match the other pattern in the irq controller driver for consistency.
Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
LTO patches add __visible to the asmlinkage define, causing
compilation warnings like:
drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c:283:1: warning: 'externally_visible'
attribute have effect only on public objects [-Wattributes]
Drop asmlinkage here to avoid such warnings.
Reported-by: Olof's autobuilder <build@lixom.net>
Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: khilman@linaro.org
Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Josh Cartwright <joshc@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1393980030-17770-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
sun4i_irq_ack() is only referenced in this file, so make it static.
Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com>
Acked-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1373010070.14756.2.camel@phoenix
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
During the introduction of the Allwinner SoC platforms, sunxi was
initially meant as a generic name for all the variants of the Allwinner
SoC.
It was ok at the time of the support of only the A10 and A13 that
looks pretty much the same, but it's beginning to be troublesome with
the future addition of the Allwinner A31 (sun6i) that is quite
different, and would introduce some weird logic, where sunxi would
actually mean in some case sun4i and sun5i but without sun6i...
Moreover, it makes the compatible strings naming scheme not consistent
with other architectures, where usually for this kind of compability, we
just use the oldest SoC name that has this IP, so let's do just this.
Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
