From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752613AbbGQFCS (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2015 01:02:18 -0400 Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:49638 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750796AbbGQFCR (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2015 01:02:17 -0400 Message-ID: <55A88C53.7090408@ti.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 10:32:11 +0530 From: Sekhar Nori User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vitaly Andrianov , Linus Walleij , Kevin Hilman CC: Alexandre Courbot , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio/davinci: add interrupt support for GPIOs 16-31 References: <1434647449-5393-1-git-send-email-vitalya@ti.com> <55A77392.30400@ti.com> <55A7ECE1.2060704@ti.com> In-Reply-To: <55A7ECE1.2060704@ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 16 July 2015 11:11 PM, Vitaly Andrianov wrote: > > > On 07/16/2015 05:04 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote: >> On Tuesday 14 July 2015 07:31 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Vitaly Andrianov >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Interrupts for GPIOs 16 through 31 are enabled by bit 1 in the >>>> "binten" register (offset 8). Previous versions of GPIO only >>>> used bit 0, which enables GPIO 0-15 interrupts. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Reece Pollack >>>> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Andrianov >>> >>> Sekhar/Kevin: OK with this? We don't have a maintainer >>> listed for davinci GPIO so I assume it's you guys... >> >> Hi Linus, I had reviewed this patch and there was a v2 send based on my >> comments on July 03. >> >>> Should this be tagged for stable? >> >> Not sure about that. It affects Keystone devices. Vitaly? >> >> Thanks, >> Sekhar >> > We used this patch for a long time. So, I guess it is stable. You misunderstood. Should this patch be marked for backporting to older kernels because it fixes a critical issue on devices otherwise working in that kernel? See Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt Thanks, Sekhar