[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdVmAPTP5k_U+=EvBqysGz0Jk9YoytFMTSA_1T-tmVvZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 12:19:46 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy Natarajan <sathyaosid@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpio: gpio-crystalcove: Skip IRQ CTRL register
update for virtual GPIOs
On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 2:21 AM,
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
>
> Commit 9a752b4c9ab9 ("gpio: crystalcove: Do not write regular gpio
> registers for virtual GPIOs") added support to skip GPIO register
> update for virtual GPIOs, but it missed to add skip logic in
> crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl() function. This patch fixes it.
> @@ -134,6 +134,9 @@ static void crystalcove_update_irq_ctrl(struct crystalcove_gpio *cg, int gpio)
> {
> int reg = to_reg(gpio, CTRL_IN);
>
> + if (reg < 0)
> + return;
> +
> regmap_update_bits(cg->regmap, reg, CTLI_INTCNT_BE, cg->intcnt_value);
> }
Shouldn't it have been done using irq_valid_mask flag in the first place?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists