Received: by 2002:a05:7412:bbc7:b0:fc:a2b0:25d7 with SMTP id kh7csp173008rdb; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 05:35:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGSgC9VSbOQ5YOdhBrXPimXVrjImuuU6YV/y+dlycYdfnh5hyNrZEh8roNLBqfUWt2wfpcC X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:22d4:b0:785:478c:ece4 with SMTP id o20-20020a05620a22d400b00785478cece4mr1156040qki.12.1706794556559; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 05:35:56 -0800 (PST) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWpkdiKC0wx2PqnNUw/UDZBSEz8wKa2VuXq3nonMBzOW4VAZvowRDsK0hITh7xIP8dQYOmyd3WXOGH1UE05XUf4NZH5rJ0zmWVeQ7adHA== Return-Path: Received: from ny.mirrors.kernel.org (ny.mirrors.kernel.org. [147.75.199.223]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f11-20020a05620a20cb00b00783fb5cf4d6si6871512qka.614.2024.02.01.05.35.56 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 01 Feb 2024 05:35:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-48242-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=neutral (body hash did not verify) header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=FYhdbYvD; arc=fail (body hash mismatch); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-48242-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-48242-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ny.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0ED471C23376 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 13:35:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D66F5B677; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 13:35:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="FYhdbYvD" Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A04AE86627; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 13:35:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706794522; cv=none; b=RyWAaYkXcbCYjoPZseEtLcfsfyj+UNVeLokwEV8u+/JmRi1ngSY5v6vjlWOPZjuzPL5UPbFeXKsW2GtlfqZYA4rmbvvhUrXaqDxJOTMk0QOSY16FMSgVne++doA6VO+E9caj0YMnHXE4wUYXIguoFYBZLaomNJ7OjjKVug5d+Ok= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706794522; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8R003JGMGdcafl0yvgQeD16x26KoEPRNjns70fXm3Is=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ehKs8j0Ylh1agjbvawak0yrXvaAeu76K2tLf/CVDFRIRfiLzRZWXifyE0ieM43SC5lhrVgGre3BHu/nf+Zvfc8EIrOzHV2YcOeEhQjENRlNknSsbgCTSGQZfSnbwfpBYqfZNAReFAYFPXtd/A9VgktE1VbYHsbmmfOqISa0JBrc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=FYhdbYvD; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1706794520; x=1738330520; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=8R003JGMGdcafl0yvgQeD16x26KoEPRNjns70fXm3Is=; b=FYhdbYvDx+GTRQaJjLrv1rWY+zfVWEQW1GH1wX2oUuonZoOECzBsSmmF BxiBTr7cpyY1DxC/+htJLZnhaZXQHj6WBHnqfgiEYSPh/c6NEcQWilUgV WzIyr6oa9u/EEDY9uMF10ypEwfeoOygkU6oHmHvZaGLecnTgoieb/vZpF iZUn8QOoVBVLCcYIX1iVSP2Q4YxdG+ipF94Fip2tKygyGaHEyYp80l3Al chhHQwldVH/9AX8Otzn1nDQ80Ar/7mXhR8JQsREBtqE90Ts6gteGBht3u 64gb1vbkbx0j6HKP26lxV2EpWybI1BH+FcMwSIM3x4vQJBlba9qopWcx3 A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10969"; a="2828438" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,234,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="2828438" Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmvoesa107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2024 05:35:20 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10969"; a="879105718" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,234,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="879105718" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Feb 2024 05:35:18 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1rVWxr-00000000qJ3-1xbs; Thu, 01 Feb 2024 15:18:47 +0200 Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 15:18:47 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Arturas Moskvinas Cc: linus.walleij@linaro.org, u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, radim.pavlik@tbs-biometrics.com, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: mcp23s08: Check only GPIOs which have interrupts enabled Message-ID: References: <20240130073710.10110-1-arturas.moskvinas@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 02:19:38PM +0200, Arturas Moskvinas wrote: > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 2:03 PM Andy Shevchenko > wrote: .. > > > + /* We must check all of the inputs with enabled interrupts > > > + * on the chip, otherwise we may not notice a change > > > + * on >=2 pins. > > > > Missing space after =. But better to spell in proper English, i.e. > > "...great than or equal to 2 pins." > > > + /* > + * We must check all of the inputs with enabled interrupts > + * on the chip, otherwise we may not notice a change > + * on more than one pin. > > Does this sound better? LGTM, thanks. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko