[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZzMwh2GMP-bE7aLO@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 12:40:07 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Ye Zhang <ye.zhang@...k-chips.com>, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
heiko@...ech.de, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com, tao.huang@...k-chips.com,
finley.xiao@...k-chips.com, tim.chen@...k-chips.com,
elaine.zhang@...k-chips.com,
Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] gpio: rockchip: Set input direction when request
irq
On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 09:48:06AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 2:54 AM Ye Zhang <ye.zhang@...k-chips.com> wrote:
> >
> > Since the GPIO can only generate interrupts when its direction is set to
> > input, it is set to input before requesting the interrupt resources.
...
> This looks like a fix to me, do you want it sent for stable? If so,
> please add the Fixes tag and put it first in the series.
Independently on the resolution on this, can the first three be applied to
for-next? I think they are valuable from the documentation perspective as
it adds the explanation of the version register bit fields.
The last one seems to me independent (code wise, meaning no potential
conflicts) to the rest and may be applied to for-current later on.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists