Re: [RFC v7 3/6] irqchip: add mpfs gpio interrupt mux

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
	Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v7 3/6] irqchip: add mpfs gpio interrupt mux
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2024 12:40:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sevn1a3d.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240802-rippling-clubbing-5318f914f16a@spud>

On Fri, Aug 02 2024 at 09:08, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 08:49:08PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 01 2024 at 16:09, Conor Dooley wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 12:41:25PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> >> > +	/*
>> >> > +	 * If a bit is set in the mux, GPIO the corresponding interrupt from
>> >> > +	 * controller 2 is direct and that controllers 0 or 1 is muxed.
>> >> 
>> >> This is not a coherent sentence.
>> >
>> > It should read "controller 0 or 1;s interrupt is muxed". Does that make
>
> Heh, I even typoed here, the ; should be a '.
>
>> > more sense to you?
>> 
>> No: If a bit is set in the mux, GPIO the corresponding...
>> 
>> I'm already failing at 'GPIO'. My parser expects a verb there :)
>
> Ah, so double mistake in the sentence. s/GPIO// I suppose. An updated
> comment could be:
>
> "If a bit is set in the mux, the corresponding interrupt from GPIO
> controller 2 is direct and controller 0 or 1's interrupt is muxed"

That's actually understandable for mere mortals :)