[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170421220025.GC31650@fury>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 15:00:25 -0700
From: Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
To: sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com
Cc: gnurou@...il.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org, edubezval@...il.com,
rui.zhang@...el.com, lee.jones@...aro.org, andy@...radead.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
sathyaosid@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] platform: x86: intel_bxtwc_tmu: remove first
level irq unmask
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 04:26:00PM -0700, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
>
> Currently in WCOVE PMIC mfd driver, all second level irq chips
By currently I believe you mean after the earlier patch in this series is
applied, correct? This one is dependent on the previous one?
> are chained to the respective first level irqs. So there is no
> need for explicitly unmasking the first level irq in this
> driver. This patches removes this level 1 irq unmask support.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
For platform drivers x86:
Reviewed-by: Darren Hart (VMware) <dvhart@...radead.org>
Are you working with a specific maintainers to pull this in as a series? With so
many subsystems, we need to coordinate to make sure we don't make a mess for
Linus. Given the interdependencies, I'd recommend someone pull the series in as
a whole - maybe into MFD? Lee, do you have a preference?
--
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center
Powered by blists - more mailing lists