[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4982a703-fc6b-b778-78a5-ada5ea5aedb2@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 09:42:19 -0800
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>
Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
Markus Mayer <mmayer@...adcom.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: (subset) [PATCH 0/6] rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: add RTC alarm irq
On 1/23/23 15:08, 'Alexandre Belloni' via BCM-KERNEL-FEEDBACK-LIST,PDL
wrote:
>
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 11:01:41 -0800, Doug Berger wrote:
>> Support is added for an interrupt that can be triggered from the
>> brcmstb-waketimer hardware while the system is awake.
>>
>> This interrupt allows the driver to pass the rtctest selftest.
>>
>> Doug Berger (6):
>> rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: introduce WKTMR_ALARM_EVENT flag
>> rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: non-functional code changes
>> rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: compensate for lack of wktmr disable
>> rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: rename irq to wake_irq
>> dt-bindings: rtc: brcm,brcmstb-waketimer: add alarm interrupt
>> rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: allow use as non-wake alarm
>>
>> [...]
>
> Applied, thanks!
>
> [1/6] rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: introduce WKTMR_ALARM_EVENT flag
> commit: 90226f6b17a3edcb0bddaf2f16991861c99d6a15
> [2/6] rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: non-functional code changes
> commit: 2cd98b22c1443d1f2921a371baee658da184868e
> [3/6] rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: compensate for lack of wktmr disable
> commit: 516ae02c38ff3ae867f9b19fa050f78157e2bdae
> [4/6] rtc: brcmstb-waketimer: rename irq to wake_irq
> commit: eae258edcb8705932c9e5c61a99f91d8235f688b
That was quick, how about patch 6? It does not actually have a
dependency on the Device Tree binding (patch 5) and the second interrupt
is looked up by index.
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists