From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] gpio/omap: Add DT support to GPIO driver Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2013 20:05:24 +0000 Message-ID: <20130302200524.D230F3E1571@localhost> References: <1329321854-24490-1-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <1329321854-24490-4-git-send-email-b-cousson@ti.com> <4F44FA56.7020000@gmail.com> <4F44FC37.2000701@ti.com> <4F452484.5080503@gmail.com> <74CDBE0F657A3D45AFBB94109FB122FF17BD8BC6C1@HQMAIL01.nvidia.com> <4F47AD08.4030504@ti.com> <512D39DA.7020306@ti.com> <512D3AB1.1080202@wwwdotorg.org> <512D3EC2.6050408@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <512D3EC2.6050408-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: Jon Hunter , Stephen Warren Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas , Stephen Warren , Kevin Hilman , "devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org" , "linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , Tarun Kanti DebBarma , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:01:22 -0600, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 02/26/2013 04:44 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > > On 02/26/2013 03:40 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > >> On 02/26/2013 04:01 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: > >> Are you requesting the gpio anywhere? If not then this is not going to > >> work as-is. This was discussed fairly recently [1] and the conclusion > >> was that the gpio needs to be requested before we can use as an interrupt. > > > > That seems wrong; the GPIO/IRQ driver should handle this internally. The > > Ethernet driver shouldn't know/care whether the interrupt it's given is > > some form of dedicated interrupt or a GPIO-based interrupt, and even if > > it somehow did, there's no irq_to_gpio() any more, so the driver can't > > tell which GPIO ID it should request, unless it's given yet another > > property to represent this. > > I agree that ideally this should be handled internally. Did you read the > discussion on the thread that I referenced [1]? If you have any thoughts > we are open to ideas :-) I'm on an airplane right now, but I agree 100% with Stephen. I'll try to remember to go read that thread and respond, but this falls firmly in the its-a-bug category for me. :-) g.