From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: sch: Add interrupt support Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 11:18:02 +0300 Message-ID: <20190424081802.GV2654@lahna.fi.intel.com> References: <20190424075816.GU2654@lahna.fi.intel.com> <8999d3f8-d169-eb85-bd2f-08c99d184ea2@siemens.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8999d3f8-d169-eb85-bd2f-08c99d184ea2@siemens.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Kiszka Cc: Andy Shevchenko , Linus Walleij , Bartosz Golaszewski , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 10:12:42AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 24.04.19 09:58, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > +Rafael and linux-acpi. > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:23:49AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: > > > From: Jan Kiszka > > > > > > Validated on the Quark platform, this adds interrupt support on rising > > > and/or falling edges. > > > > The irqchip parts look good to me but but the ACPI SCI handling seems > > weird. This is typically handled by ACPI core based on the values read > > from FADT ACPI table. What does it contain on this Quark platform? > > There is no FADT on the original Quark firmware, nor did we add one. As we > are talking about existing devices, possibly not only Quarks, I was going > down the ACPI-independent way to hook into the interrupt. But I'm open to > learn about better alternatives. Hmm, if it does not have FADT table why would you need SCI then? Is this implementing some real use case?