On Mon 09 May 17:36 PDT 2016, Andrew Duggan wrote: > Hi Bjorn, > > On 05/06/2016 09:40 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > >The first version of the regulator support patch suffered from being > >implemented in the transport driver, as a work around for resource availability > >racing (EPROBE_DEFER of the core driver) with the interrupt handler. > > > >After reconsidering the solutions discussed following that I concluded that the > >interrupt management is not really part of the transport, neither conceptually > >or electrically. I therefor here suggest (patch 1/3) to move the interrupt > >registration and handling to the core rmi driver. > > My concern with moving interrupt processing to the core is that not all > transports report attn to the rmi core using an irq. The HID and SMBus > transports which are currently in development, reside a little higher in the > stack and attention is reported using different mechanisms. We moved > interrupt handling to the transport drivers so that they could handle the > differences in how attn is reported. > I suspected that to be the case. > This message has some of the previous discussion regarding interrupt > processing: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/28/123 > > Similarly, not all transports will need support for regulators. Implementing > both in the transport drivers avoids the EPROBE_DEFER racing and avoids > adding checks in the core to see if it needs to handle interrupts and manage > regulators. > So either we duplicate the regulator support in spi/i2c or we make them optional in the core driver. Sounds like you prefer the prior, i.e. v1 of my patch. Regards, Bjorn -- 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
