Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] mfd: lubbock_io: add lubbock_io board

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> What I'd suggest (and always have done) is:
>
> 	dev_err(&pdev->dev, "couldn't request main irq%d: %d\n",
> 		irq, ret);
I like it, it's even more compact, I'll use it for next patch version.

> but I guess printing the IRQ number no longer makes sense with todays
> dynamic mapping of logical IRQ numbers, as it is no longer meaningful.
Yes ... we're not yet there with pxa gpio interrupts, maybe it will come
eventually one day.

For Lee:
> > > platform_get_irq()?
> > No. I need the flags.
> Where are they used?
A couple of lines below, using local "irqflags" variable :
       ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, cot->irq, lubbock_irq_handler,
                              irqflags, dev_name(&pdev->dev), cot);

Cheers.

-- 
Robert

--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux