[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190129090706.33wcxb6d2c64yx7c@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 10:07:06 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] irq/irq_sim: provide irq_sim_fire_type()
Hello Bartosz,
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 09:44:05AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> -void irq_sim_fire(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int offset)
> +void irq_sim_fire_type(struct irq_sim *sim,
> + unsigned int offset, unsigned int type)
> {
> struct irq_sim_irq_ctx *ctx = irq_sim_get_ctx(sim, offset);
>
> - if (ctx->enabled) {
> + /* Only care about relevant flags. */
> + type &= IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> +
> + if (ctx->enabled && (ctx->type & type)) {
> set_bit(offset, sim->work_ctx.pending);
> irq_work_queue(&sim->work_ctx.work);
> }
> }
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_sim_fire);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_sim_fire_type);
This looks better than the previous variant. I wonder if it would be
still more sensible to have type only in the mockup driver. But I don't
have the complete picture here and it might be easier this way.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists