Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S938994AbcJXOjW (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:39:22 -0400 Received: from mail-qt0-f180.google.com ([209.85.216.180]:32886 "EHLO mail-qt0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933214AbcJXOjT (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:39:19 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1477040998-2016-1-git-send-email-narmstrong@baylibre.com> From: Linus Walleij Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 16:39:17 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] pinctrl: Add SX150X GPIO Extender Pinctrl Driver To: Andrey Smirnov , Neil Armstrong Cc: Peter Rosin , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Roland Stigge , Vladimir Zapolskiy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 610 Lines: 18 On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Andrey Smirnov wrote: > It seem strange to me that the driver uses "handle_edge_irq", given > how none of the individual interrupts seem to require any ACKing, > since it is all handled in sx150x_irq_thread_fn(), line 533. More so, > I had trouble finding who/where sets .irq_ack() callback, which AFAIU > is mandatory for handle_edge_irq(). Yes that looks strange. Neil have you tested IRQs with this code? If there is trouble, please follow up with a fix for the edge handler. Maybe it should just be handle_simple_irq(). Yours, Linus Walleij