[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VeQGxnGO4o5a1vFzS9XAMjmvwoJ3=pWLvNQT6mXEKcqWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 12:18:29 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
林圣欢 <linshenghuan@...gtu-china.com>,
khilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
narmstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
"martin.blumenstingl" <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>,
linux-gpio <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-amlogic <linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 0001-add-amlogic-gpio-to-irq
On Fri, Dec 4, 2020 at 4:25 PM Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com> wrote:
> On Fri 04 Dec 2020 at 10:13, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> This HW only has 8 irqs that can each be mapped to a pin. No direct
> translation can be made, we have to allocate an irq to monitor the line.
> So when gpio_to_irq() was called, we had to do that allocation dynamically
> to return a valid irq number. Since there was no counter part to
> gpio_to_irq(), those allocation cannot be freed during the lifetime of
> the device.
I'm not sure why we are talking about legacy API which should not be used.
Besides that I didn't get what you meant under counterpart API (IRQ
descriptor has a mapping to the IRQ chip which keeps the mapping to
whatever hardware wants).
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists