From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] at91_ether: use gpio_is_valid for phy IRQ line Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 00:40:44 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20111130.004044.1357362466737795134.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1322169674-4109-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> <20111129.185342.105454076866922618.davem@davemloft.net> <20111130044403.GY15008@game.jcrosoft.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nicolas.ferre@atmel.com, jamie@jamieiles.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org To: plagnioj@jcrosoft.com Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20111130044403.GY15008@game.jcrosoft.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 05:44:03 +0100 > On 18:53 Tue 29 Nov , David Miller wrote: >> From: Nicolas Ferre >> Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 22:21:14 +0100 >> >> > Use the generic gpiolib gpio_is_valid() function to test >> > if the phy IRQ line GPIO is actually provided. >> > >> > For non-connected or non-existing phy IRQ lines, -EINVAL >> > value is used for phy_irq_pin field of struct at91_eth_data. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre >> >> I'm assuming this goes through the ARM tree, because in both of my networking >> trees there is no ARM at91 implementation of gpio_is_valid(). > yes the depending patch series is in the arm-soc > > can we have your ack or sob? Acked-by: David S. Miller