Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the mfd tree with the ux500-core tree

From: Paul Mundt <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2010 13:23:44 +0900

On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 03:21:48PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> The genirq core is being converted to pass struct irq_data to irq_chip
> operations rather than an IRQ number. Update the tc35892 driver to the
> new APIs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <[email-masked]>
> Acked-by: Rabin Vincent <[email-masked]>
> Signed-off-by: Samuel Ortiz <[email-masked]>

Sorry to hijack the thread..

> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tc3589x.c b/drivers/mfd/tc3589x.c
> index 32291fe..dde2d858 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/tc3589x.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tc3589x.c
> @@ -170,15 +170,15 @@ again:
>  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>  }
>  
> -static void tc3589x_irq_dummy(unsigned int irq)
> +static void tc3589x_irq_dummy(struct irq_data *data)
>  {
>  	/* No mask/unmask at this level */
>  }
>  
>  static struct irq_chip tc3589x_irq_chip = {
> -	.name	= "tc3589x",
> -	.mask	= tc3589x_irq_dummy,
> -	.unmask	= tc3589x_irq_dummy,
> +	.name		= "tc3589x",
> +	.irq_mask	= tc3589x_irq_dummy,
> +	.irq_unmask	= tc3589x_irq_dummy,
>  };
>  
>  static int tc3589x_irq_init(struct tc3589x *tc3589x)

Is there some reason you don't just kill this off and use dummy_irq_chip?