On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 4:21 PM, Sebastian Reichel <sre@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > IMHO the explicit line-inverter is a bit over-engineered and > implicit line-inverter is enough, but I'm fine with both solutions. > I think the DT binding maintainers should comment on this though, > since it's pretty much a core decision about interrupt specifiers. I feel the same. I am very much back and forth on the subject. Simplicity of use vs modelling the system as it actually works. Back and forth. I honestly have just a very vague idea about this. I don't know if Marc Z as irqchip maintainer has some idea on how to model inverters on irq lines or if he's seen some solutions to it out there. Yours, Linus Walleij -- 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
