On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 11:18:01AM +0800, fange zhang wrote:
>
>
> On 2024/12/13 18:19, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 at 11:21, fange zhang <quic_fangez@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2024/12/10 19:02, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 10, 2024 at 02:54:00PM +0800, Fange Zhang wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > + i2c@0 {
> > > > > + reg = <0>;
> > > > > + #address-cells = <1>;
> > > > > + #size-cells = <0>;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + anx7625@58 {
> > > > > + compatible = "analogix,anx7625";
> > > > > + reg = <0x58>;
> > > > > + interrupt-parent = <&ioexp>;
> > > > > + interrupts = <0 0>;
> > > will change it to interrupts-extended in next patch
> > > - interrupt-parent = <&ioexp>;
> > > - interrupts = <0 0>;
> > > + interrupts-extended = <&ioexp 0 IRQ_TYPE_NONE>;
> >
> > Yes, much better. BTW: are you sure that it's really IRQ_TYPE_NONE?
> We extensively tested FALLING and BOTH type, and they all work. However, I
> believe it’s better to use the default type, which is the same as the
> downstream approach. This way, it will be more stable.
Following downstream is a lame reason. Downstream kernels are frequently
wrong in many ways. So please check the actual documentation for ANX7625
and specify correct interrupt type.
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
