[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130910213718.GH29403@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 22:37:18 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc: Lars Poeschel <poeschel@...onage.de>,
Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Lars Poeschel <larsi@....tu-dresden.de>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
Enric Balletbo i Serra <eballetbo@...il.com>,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
Balaji T K <balajitk@...com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Jon Hunter <jgchunter@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] gpio: interrupt consistency check for OF GPIO IRQs
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 01:53:47PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> Doesn't this patch call gpio_request() on the GPIO first, and hence
> prevent the driver's own gpio_request() from succeeding, since the GPIO
> is already requested? If this is not a problem, it sounds like a bug in
> gpio_request() not ensuring mutual exclusion for the GPIO.
Or at the very least something that's likely to break in the future.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists