Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] bluetooth: hci_bcm: enable IRQ capability from node
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc:     marcel@holtmann.org, johan.hedberg@gmail.com,
        linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, nsaenzjulienne@suse.de,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, khilman@baylibre.com
References: <20191213105521.4290-1-glaroque@baylibre.com>
 <20191213111702.GX10631@localhost>
 <162e5588-a702-6042-6934-dd41b64fa1dc@baylibre.com>
 <20191213134404.GY10631@localhost>
From:   guillaume La Roque <glaroque@baylibre.com>
Message-ID: <08ae6108-0829-3bb4-f398-7e6a58719d29@baylibre.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Dec 2019 15:07:36 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20191213134404.GY10631@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 12/13/19 2:44 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 01:31:18PM +0100, guillaume La Roque wrote:
>> Hi Johan,
>>
>> On 12/13/19 12:17 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 11:55:21AM +0100, Guillaume La Roque wrote:
>>>> @@ -1421,6 +1422,7 @@ static int bcm_serdev_probe(struct serdev_device *serdev)
>>>>  #endif
>>>>  	bcmdev->serdev_hu.serdev = serdev;
>>>>  	serdev_device_set_drvdata(serdev, bcmdev);
>>>> +	bcmdev->irq = of_irq_get(bcmdev->dev->of_node, 0);
>>> Shouldn't you be used using of_irq_get_byname()?
>> i can use it if you prefer but no other interrupt need to be defined
> Maybe not needed then. Was just thinking it may make it more clear that
> you now have two ways to specify the "host-wakeup" interrupt (and in
> your proposed implementation the interrupts-property happens to take
> priority). Perhaps that can be sorted out when you submit the binding
> update for review.

no problem i add a "host-wakeup" interrupt-name.
you are right it will be more clear with name and we know why this interrupt is needed.

> Johan

thanks

Guillaume