[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <013101d98d5c$b8fdd1d0$2af97570$@trustnetic.com>
Date: Tue, 23 May 2023 17:55:36 +0800
From: Jiawen Wu <jiawenwu@...stnetic.com>
To: "'Andy Shevchenko'" <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
"'Michael Walle'" <michael@...le.cc>,
"'Andrew Lunn'" <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
<jsd@...ihalf.com>,
<Jose.Abreu@...opsys.com>,
<hkallweit1@...il.com>,
<linux@...linux.org.uk>,
<linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
<mengyuanlou@...-swift.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next v8 6/9] net: txgbe: Support GPIO to SFP socket
> > Anyway it is a bit complicated, could I use this version of GPIO implementation if
> > it's really tough?
>
> It's possible but from GPIO subsystem point of view it's discouraged
> as long as there is no technical impediment to go the regmap way.
After these days of trying, I guess there are still some bugs on gpio - regmap - irq.
It looks like an compatibility issue with gpio_irq_chip and regmap_irq_chip (My rough
fixes seems to work).
Other than that, it seems to be no way to add interrupt trigger in regmap_irq_thread(),
to solve the both-edge problem for my hardware.
I'd be willing to use gpio-regmap if above issues worked out, I learned IRQ controller,
IRQ domain, etc. , after all. But if not, I'd like to implement GPIO in the original way,
it was tested to work. May I? Thanks for all your suggestions.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists