On 01/12/14 11:23, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 11:19:41AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> Hi Russell, >> >> On 01/12/14 11:03, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>> 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). > > I don't think so - gic_configure_irq() will treat it as a no-op as far > as trying to configure the IRQ settings. I agree. But that's following ARM's tradition of making PPIs non-configurable. I seem to remember that there is at least one occurrence of a GIC with configurable PPIs (Qualcomm, IIRC). With this use case in mind, Liviu's patch allows an active-low interrupt to be correctly configured as level, for example. 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
