Hi Russell, On 01/12/14 11:03, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 10:46:13AM +0000, Liviu Dudau wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 10:41:45AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 05:55:40PM +0000, Liviu Dudau wrote: >>>> + /* >>>> + * PPIs are optionally configurable, but we cannot distinguish >>>> + * between high and low, nor falling and rising. Change the >>>> + * type so that it passes the next check. >>> >>> This comment could do with a /lot/ of improvement. It sounds like the >>> only reason this code exists is to bypass the check. If that's all >>> that's being done, there's better ways to code it. >> >> Hi Russell, >> >> You are right, all I want to do is bypass the next check because *if* >> the PPIs can be configured, then any combination is valid (edge >> raising/falling, level low/high). In real systems, PPIs tend to be >> configured with active level low. That falls the existing check. > > "fails" :) > > If all you want to do is to bypass the following check, what's wrong > with actually doing that: > > - if (type != IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH && type != IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING) > + if (gicirq >= 32 && type != IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH && > + type != IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING) > return -EINVAL; > I think that will require some additional changes to gic_configure_irq (in irq-gic-common.c). Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... -- 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
