[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdFE6A+Gv=-OsNT_GqJyzOfLDXSB+gant_jenSgtEYA7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 18:26:58 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...nel.org>, Christophe Leroy <chleroy@...nel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM7XXX ARM ARCHITECTURE" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] gpio: brcmstb: allow parent_irq to wake
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 9:24 PM Florian Fainelli
<florian.fainelli@...adcom.com> wrote:
> On 1/21/2026 11:42 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 3:06 AM Florian Fainelli
> > <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com> wrote:
...
> >> + if (priv->suspended && bank->wake_active & (u32)status) {
> >
> > Why casting?
>
> status is an unsigned long, which is what for_each_set_bit() expects, so
> it is intended here to ensure the top bits are not participating in the
> comparison, I think this is just being extra explicit with intent here.
Isn't that guaranteed by the C standard?
> >> + priv->suspended = false;
> >> + pm_wakeup_event(&priv->pdev->dev, 0);
> >> + }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists