Now that we have Timers probed from DT, don't need legacy domain
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta
---
arch/arc/kernel/intc-arcv2.c | 4 ++--
arch/arc/kernel/intc-compact.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arc/kernel/intc-arcv2.c b/arch/arc/kernel/intc-arcv
This removes the quirk from arc_request_percpu_irq() and paves way for
future simplifications
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta
---
arch/arc/kernel/intc-compact.c | 3 ++-
arch/arc/kernel/irq.c | 12
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arc/kernel
- With only 1 caller, simply opencode it.
- The idea however is to remove the API usage since it has a subltle
design flaw - relies on being called on cpu0 first. This is true for
some early per cpu irqs such as TIMER/IPI, but not for late probed
per cpu peripherals such a perf. And it's usa
Hi,
This series came out as a result of discussions during EZChip platform code
review.
There is one real fix for irq domain lookup as pointed by Marc.
Please have alook.
Thx,
-Vineet
Vineet Gupta (5):
ARC: [intc-compact] Remove IPI setup from ARCompact port
ARC: [intc-compact] setup TIMER
The primary interrupt handler arch_do_IRQ() was passing hwirq as linux
virq to core code. This was fragile and worked so far as we only had
legacy/linear
domains.
This came out of a rant by Marc Zyngier.
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-snps-arc/2015-December/000298.html
Cc: Marc Zyngi
There is no real ARC700 based SMP SoC so remove IPI definition.
EZChip's SMP ARC700 is going to use a different intc and IPI provider
anyways.
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta
---
arch/arc/include/asm/irq.h | 5 +
arch/arc/kernel/intc-compact.c | 3 ---
2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 dele
This patch series adds an export which can be set by system debuggers to
direct the hard lockup and soft lockup detector to trigger a breakpoint
exception and enter a debugger if one is active. It is assumed that if
someone sets this variable, then an breakpoint handler of some sort will
be active
Hi Bjorn,
Thanks for the info.
Joao
On 1/27/2016 9:59 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> Hi Joao,
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 02:29:21PM +, Joao Pinto wrote:
>> Hi Bjorn,
>> Could you please tell me what are the perspectives of pulling this patch set
>> to
>> mainline?
>
> Sorry for the delay. I
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Alexey Brodkin
wrote:
> Hi Carlos,
>
> On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 18:30 +, Carlos Palminha wrote:
>> hi...
>>
>> i just found that its blocking waiting for console_lock...
>> @vineet, alexey: i think that console_lock is architecture dependent right?
>> Do you know
Hi Carlos,
On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 18:30 +, Carlos Palminha wrote:
> hi...
>
> i just found that its blocking waiting for console_lock...
> @vineet, alexey: i think that console_lock is architecture dependent right?
> Do you know any issue with console_lock
> for ARC?
I'm not really sure "con
10 matches
Mail list logo