From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hdegoede@redhat.com (Hans de Goede) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 18:45:03 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3] input: Add support for ChipOne icn8318 based touchscreens In-Reply-To: <20150322224214.GA9792@dtor-ws> References: <1426007133-9606-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20150322040305.GA40622@dtor-ws> <550EA0E7.30608@redhat.com> <20150322224214.GA9792@dtor-ws> Message-ID: <5511A29F.1010404@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On 03/22/2015 11:42 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 12:00:55PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 22-03-15 05:03, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> Hi Hans, >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 06:05:33PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >>>> + error = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, client->irq, NULL, icn8318_irq, >>>> + IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_ONESHOT, >>> >>> Shouldn't we let DT data tell us what trigger to use? I.e. just leave >>> IRQF_ONESHOT here? >> >> That is an interesting question, that new data is available is signalled by >> the irq pin of the chip going low is a property of the chip, not the board >> layout, so I believe it is best to leave this as is. > > My concern is that even if pin behavior is property of chip maybe on > some boards we want to use level-triggered interrupts instead of edge? > And if we indeed want to hard-code the trigger then shouldn't the > binding document use onecell mapping (so that users do not attempt to > configure triggers from DT)? The number of irq cells is specified by the interrupt controller driver rather then by the device binding. > >> >> Also note that if we want to get this from devicetree, that simply leaving out the >> flag is not enough, we must specifically get the data from devicetree and pass >> it into request_irq AFAICT. So the above would change to: >> >> irqflags = irqd_get_trigger_type(irq_get_irq_data(client->irq)) | IRQF_ONESHOT, >> error = devm_request_threaded_irq(dev, client->irq, NULL, icn8318_irq, irqflags, > > No, of_irq_get() that i2c core calls before probing driver should > already set the trigger type for us. There is no need for the individual > drivers to do that. Ah I see, ok I've just tested removing the IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING flag and indeed things still work fine, so feel free to merge this patch with that flagged dropped. Regards, Hans