[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y3Ds59lTf5/4Vfe3@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2022 15:11:03 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>
Cc: linus.walleij@...aro.org, brgl@...ev.pl,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
michael@...le.cc, broonie@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] regmap-irq: Add handle_mask_sync() callback
On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 08:08:40AM -0500, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 02:42:49PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 08:55:51PM -0500, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> > > Provide a public callback handle_mask_sync() that drivers can use when
> > > they have more complex IRQ masking logic. The default implementation is
> > > regmap_irq_handle_mask_sync(), used if the chip doesn't provide its own
> > > callback.
...
> > > + * @handle_mask_sync: Callback used to handle IRQ mask syncs. The index will be
> > > + * in the range [0, num_regs[
> >
> > Not sure if it's a typo ([ vs. ]), but if you want to say "not including the
> > last", use mathematical notation, i.e. "[0, num_regs)".
>
> I was following the convention used in the @get_irq_reg description, but
> I agree that mathematical notation would be much clearer.
Ah, maybe cleaning up the rest then?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists