[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191213134404.GY10631@localhost>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 14:44:04 +0100
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: guillaume La Roque <glaroque@...libre.com>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, marcel@...tmann.org,
johan.hedberg@...il.com, linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
nsaenzjulienne@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
khilman@...libre.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] bluetooth: hci_bcm: enable IRQ capability from node
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 01:31:18PM +0100, guillaume La Roque wrote:
> Hi Johan,
>
> On 12/13/19 12:17 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 11:55:21AM +0100, Guillaume La Roque wrote:
> >> @@ -1421,6 +1422,7 @@ static int bcm_serdev_probe(struct serdev_device *serdev)
> >> #endif
> >> bcmdev->serdev_hu.serdev = serdev;
> >> serdev_device_set_drvdata(serdev, bcmdev);
> >> + bcmdev->irq = of_irq_get(bcmdev->dev->of_node, 0);
> > Shouldn't you be used using of_irq_get_byname()?
> i can use it if you prefer but no other interrupt need to be defined
Maybe not needed then. Was just thinking it may make it more clear that
you now have two ways to specify the "host-wakeup" interrupt (and in
your proposed implementation the interrupts-property happens to take
priority). Perhaps that can be sorted out when you submit the binding
update for review.
Johan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists