[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240418093359.GQ112498@black.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 12:33:59 +0300
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] gpiolib: acpi: Add fwnode name to the GPIO
interrupt label
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 12:23:45PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 07:49:07AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 01:37:27PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > It's ambiguous to have a device-related index in the GPIO interrupt
> > > label as most of the devices will have it the same or very similar.
> > > Extend label with fwnode name for better granularity. It significantly
> > > reduces the scope of searching among devices.
> >
> > Can you add an example here how it looks like before and after the
> > patch?
>
> Sure:
>
> Before:
>
> GpioInt() 0
> GpioInt() 0
>
> After:
>
> NIO1 GpioInt(0)
> URT0 GpioInt(0)
>
> Assuming I update this when applying, can you give your tag?
Sure. For both,
Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists