From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757745AbcCaRdj (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2016 13:33:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f179.google.com ([209.85.192.179]:35625 "EHLO mail-pf0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757383AbcCaRdh (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Mar 2016 13:33:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 10:33:34 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Linus Walleij Cc: Alexandre Courbot , Mika Westerberg , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpio / ACPI: ignore GpioInt() GPIOs when requesting GPIO_OUT_* Message-ID: <20160331173334.GA39098@dtor-ws> References: <20160324175025.GA4149@dtor-ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:49:13AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 6:50 PM, Dmitry Torokhov > wrote: > > > From: Dmitry Torokhov > > > > When firmware does not use _DSD properties that allow properly name GPIO > > resources, the kernel falls back on parsing _CRS resources, and will > > return entries described as GpioInt() as general purpose GPIOs even > > though they are meant to be used simply as interrupt sources for the > > device: > > Patch applied for fixes. Is this a regression so that I should > also tag it for stable? No, I think it is OK to keep it in 4.6+. Thanks. -- Dmitry