[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190424081802.GV2654@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 11:18:02 +0300
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: sch: Add interrupt support
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 10:12:42AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 24.04.19 09:58, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > +Rafael and linux-acpi.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 11:23:49AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > > From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
> > >
> > > Validated on the Quark platform, this adds interrupt support on rising
> > > and/or falling edges.
> >
> > The irqchip parts look good to me but but the ACPI SCI handling seems
> > weird. This is typically handled by ACPI core based on the values read
> > from FADT ACPI table. What does it contain on this Quark platform?
>
> There is no FADT on the original Quark firmware, nor did we add one. As we
> are talking about existing devices, possibly not only Quarks, I was going
> down the ACPI-independent way to hook into the interrupt. But I'm open to
> learn about better alternatives.
Hmm, if it does not have FADT table why would you need SCI then? Is this
implementing some real use case?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists