Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755409Ab3JXQYT (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2013 12:24:19 -0400 Received: from mail.abilis.ch ([195.70.19.74]:28704 "EHLO mail.abilis.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754924Ab3JXQYR (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Oct 2013 12:24:17 -0400 Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 18:23:47 +0200 From: Christian Ruppert To: Linus Walleij Cc: Stephen Warren , Patrice CHOTARD , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Rob Landley , Sascha Leuenberger , Pierrick Hascoet , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , Alexandre Courbot , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/03] GPIO: Add TB10x GPIO driver Message-ID: <20131024162346.GA3769@ab42.lan> References: <20131008122145.GA21985@ab42.lan> <1381235122-23730-3-git-send-email-christian.ruppert@abilis.com> <20131015134526.GB7461@ab42.lan> <20131016125855.GA20308@ab42.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20131016125855.GA20308@ab42.lan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2074 Lines: 46 On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 02:58:55PM +0200, Christian Ruppert wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 01:29:44PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Christian Ruppert > > wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 02:19:17PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > > >> It's not like I'm 100% certain on where to use one or the other > > >> construct (a mechanism like the above is needed for threaded > > >> IRQs I've noticed) but the chained handler seems more to the > > >> point does it not? > > >> > > >> The only downside I've seen is that the parent IRQ does not get > > >> a name and the accumulated IRQ stats in /proc/interrupts but > > >> surely we can live without that (or fix it). > > >> > > >> Since I'm a bit rusty on chained IRQs correct me if I'm wrong... > > > > > > OK, it took me a while to figure this back out again because as far as > > > I'm familiar with the IRQ framework you're right. The reason I'm not > > > using irq_set_chained_handler is that we have one driver instance per > > > GPIO bank and all GPIO banks share the same interrupt line. This means > > > every driver instance needs its own (different) user data and a simple > > > call to irq_set_handler_data(tb10x_gpio) won't suffice. I'm not aware of > > > any mechanism that allows interrupt sharing with the > > > irq_set_chained_handler() mechanism. > > > > OK yes makes perfect sense. We'll live with this then. > > > > I didn't see a new version of this patch with the other two, shall > > I just apply this last version in the pin control tree with the > > two other patches? > > If you don't see anything else which needs changing please do so, yes. Hi Linus, I didn't see this one pop up in the git repositories yet, are there any issues left with the driver? Best regards, Christian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/