[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYffHJEzksc5mg7JZdwTzShGaQofAmbmn65=_V3ot04Rg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 13:58:37 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Feng Kan <fkan@....com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...eaurora.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>, Phong Vo <pvo@....com>,
Tin Huynh <tnhuynh@....com>, Y Vo <yvo@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Toan Le <toanle@....com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn@...o.se>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] irqchip: GIC: Add support for irq_{get,set}_irqchip_state
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 4:25 AM, Feng Kan <fkan@....com> wrote:
> Marc:
>
> Sorry for top posting. It seems with GIC-400, the get_irqstate is not a reliable
> way of accessing the GPIO status. In our case, the gpio interrupt status can
> only be read correctly with the SPISR register. So it seems we have to go
> back to the old way of mapping the SPISR portion of the GIC in our GPIO
> driver. We wanted to ask you if that is acceptable since SPISR in not
> standard in all GIC, perhaps we can treat it differently.
As GPIO maintainer I am curious about what this is...
Can you describe the scenario where your GPIO (!) driver needs
to be poking around in the GIC SPISR?
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists