Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com>
To:     cw00.choi@samsung.com
Cc:     myungjoo.ham@samsung.com, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: extcon-next: patch "extcon: max77843: Replace irqchip mask_invert
 with unmask_base" should be reverted
Date:   Wed, 29 Jun 2022 14:09:26 +0100
Message-ID: <3AvtDmBqK77YBE1XGCycEcGxreGWRJSQ@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk


Hi Chanwoo,

I just noticed that one of my patches wound up in extcon-next as
commit a7d674db4612 ("extcon: max77843: Replace irqchip mask_invert
with unmask_base").

That patch has been applied too early and should be reverted/dropped,
as it depends on changes made in my regmap-irq refactoring series[1].
My commit message was overly broad and didn't communicate that fact,
however. Unmask registers are in fact broken right now so the patch
doesn't work as advertised and will break the driver.

For avoidance of doubt my other two extcon patches you took,

    extcon: sm5502: Drop useless mask_invert flag on irqchip
    extcon: rt8973a: Drop useless mask_invert flag on irqchip

are safe to take early and do not need to be reverted.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220623211420.918875-1-aidanmacdonald.0x0@gmail.com/

Best regards,
Aidan