On 08/23/2013 12:38 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 10:53 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 08/21/2013 05:27 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday 21 of August 2013 15:38:54 Lars Poeschel wrote: >>> >>>>>> To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check >>>>>> when adding a GPIO chip: if the chip is both gpio-controller and >>>>>> interrupt-controller, walk all children of the device tree, >>>> >>>> It seems a little odd to solve this only for DT. What about the non-DT case? >>> >>> DT is the hardware configuration system that lets you request >>> the same resource in two ways, i.e. it allows one and the same >>> node to be both gpio-controller and interrupt-controller, and >>> start handing out the same line as both GPIO and IRQ >>> independently. >> >> Huh? What stops systems using board files and platform data from having >> this issue? > > It can't be stopped but I consider it a bug if they do, as the proper > way to handle such GPIO lines is the sequence: > > request_gpio(gpio); > request_irq(gpio_to_irq(gpio)); Back in the old days of ARM board files, there were many boards that didn't do this. I guess that doesn't make it any less of a bug, but it certainly implies to me that solving this in a way that caters to that bug being present will be a lot more useful. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
