[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z9QxqH3DJvyW3sjo@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 15:39:52 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@...el.com>, giometti@...eenne.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, raymond.tan@...el.com,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mfd: intel_ehl_pse_gpio: Introduce Intel Elkhart
Lake PSE GPIO and TIO
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 12:44:50PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 07 Mar 2025, Raag Jadav wrote:
>
> > Intel Elkhart Lake Programmable Service Engine (PSE) includes two PCI
> > devices that expose two different capabilities of GPIO and Timed I/O
> > as a single PCI function through shared MMIO.
...
> > + ret = pci_alloc_irq_vectors(pci, 2, 2, PCI_IRQ_ALL_TYPES);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + ret = mfd_add_devices(&pci->dev, PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO, ehl_pse_gpio_devs,
>
> dev_*?
devm_* ?
> > + ARRAY_SIZE(ehl_pse_gpio_devs), pci_resource_n(pci, 0),
> > + pci_irq_vector(pci, 0), NULL);
> > + if (ret)
> > + pci_free_irq_vectors(pci);
Anyway, the choice as far as I understood it is motivated by usage of
pci_*_irq_vector() APIs, which are officially not manageable (however
in practice they are).
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void ehl_pse_gpio_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > +{
> > + mfd_remove_devices(&pdev->dev);
> > + pci_free_irq_vectors(pdev);
> > +}
Same here.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists