lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] regmap: regmap-irq/gpio-max77620: add level-irq support
On Wed, Jan 02, 2019 at 09:42:51AM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 31, 2018 at 07:11:27PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 10:05:33AM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> >
> > > Last night - just when I was about to get some sleep - it stroke me. I
> > > think the correct thing to do would be leaving the irq_set_type to NULL
> > > for those IRQ chips which do not support type setting. If we do that,
> > > then the irq core will take care of situations where user requests type
> > > setting but the chip does not support it. Which means the regmap-irq
> > > would be no different from any other irq chip where type setting is not
> > > supported.
> >
> > Yes, this is the best fix - let the framework handle things properly.
> > We'll need a second set of operations and to select which to use based
> > on having type information but that's fine.
> >
> > > So at the cost of removing "const" from regmap_irq_chip we could do:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > Mark, Geert, what do you think? (And maybe same for the .irq_set_wake -
> > > but I did omit this as I have never looked at the wake functionality
> > > before).
> >
> > We need a separate struct as otherwise if there's multiple devices with
> > regmap irq_chip implementations then they'll collide with each other
>
> Right. I must admit I didn't notice this! I was about to make a nasty
> error there...
>

Looking at the code I think it just copies the struct anyway,
basically using it as a template so I think this should be fine.

> > you're probably right that we need to do the same thing for the wake
> > configuration. I'll still look at applying your patch as a temporary
> > fix though.
>
> Thanks Mark. I try to cook a patch with copying of struct irq_chip still
> at this week but I wont rush it (I have some other topics under work) as
> the regression should be fixed by the other patch.
>

Just to check that is this patch here:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20181227084443.GA23991@localhost.localdomain/

Just want to check what will be applied so I know it will fix the
regression I am seeing as well.

Thanks,
Charles

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-03 18:21    [W:0.060 / U:7.600 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site