Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Thu, 12 Jul 2012 00:11:39 +0200 | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/4] gpio/pca953x: register the device irq using appropriate api's | | From | Linus Walleij <> |
| |
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Chandrabhanu Mahapatra <cmahapatra@ti.com> wrote:
> From: Leed Aguilar <leed.aguilar@ti.com> > > Here, the implementation of registration of requested IRQs has been corrected > with appropiate api's. The gpio number is requested through gpio_request_one() > API and conversion of the gpio to irq is done using the gpio_to_irq() API. > > Change-Id: I964145e2a280d6553ea2c05ea8049810a1983930
Delete that.
> Signed-off-by: Leed Aguilar <leed.aguilar@ti.com> > Signed-off-by: Chandrabhanu Mahapatra <cmahapatra@ti.com> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c | 8 +++++++- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c > index c3ca7d8..27486da 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-pca953x.c > @@ -509,7 +509,13 @@ static int pca953x_irq_setup(struct pca953x_chip *chip, > #endif > } > > - ret = request_threaded_irq(client->irq, > + ret = gpio_request_one(client->irq, GPIOF_IN, "pca953x");
Not that it's really related to this one patch, but why is a GPIO number named "irq" in client->irq??
> + if (ret) { > + dev_err(&client->dev, "gpio request failure\n"); > + goto out_failed; > + } > + > + ret = request_threaded_irq(gpio_to_irq(client->irq),
It gets ever more confused as you're seemingly converting an IRQ to an IRQ. Can we rename this variable in a separate patch?
Apart from this it looks good, but do I dare apply it without applying 3/4 (that needs ACK:ing)?
Yours, Linus Walleij
|  |