From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4953AC433E0 for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:06:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AC1E601FF for ; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:06:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232631AbhCVNGn (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Mar 2021 09:06:43 -0400 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:40152 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232816AbhCVMww (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Mar 2021 08:52:52 -0400 Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lOK32-00COle-Gt; Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:52:44 +0100 Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 13:52:44 +0100 From: Andrew Lunn To: Linus Walleij Cc: Asmaa Mnebhi , Andy Shevchenko , Andy Shevchenko , "bgolaszewski@baylibre.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Mika Westerberg , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , ACPI Devel Maling List Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpio: Support interrupts in gpio-mlxbf2.c Message-ID: References: <1614120685-7452-1-git-send-email-Asmaa@mellanox.com> <1614120685-7452-2-git-send-email-Asmaa@mellanox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 01:41:58PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 9:38 PM Asmaa Mnebhi wrote: > > > > That's fine, the hardware description model (I guess in your case > > > ACPI) should take care of that. > > > > > We cannot really pass it through the ACPI table because the ACPI > > table is common to all BlueField-2 boards. And each board may have > > a different GPIO pin associated with a particular function. This is > > why we use ACPI properties instead of GpioInt(). So that the > > bootloader can change the GPIO pin value based on the board > > id detected at boot time. > (...) > > Yes. It would belong in the ACPI table if we had a different ACPI > > table for each board. But unfortunately that is not the case. > > You have to agree with Andy about all ACPI details. > > Andy is the ACPI GPIO maintainer and we cannot merge > a patch with any kind of ACPI support without his ACK, > so hash it out as he wants it. The only people on the > planet that can make me think otherwise is if Rafael > Wysocki and Mika Westerberg say something else, > which is *extremely* unlikely. +1 And given this is burried inside a network driver, you are also going to get push back from the networking maintainers to do this correctly. Andrew