On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Add ability to handle ACPI events signalled by GPIO interrupts. > > ACPI5 platforms can use GPIO signaled ACPI events. These GPIO interrupts are > handled by ACPI event methods which need to be called from the GPIO > controller's interrupt handler. acpi_gpio_request_interrupt() finds out which > gpio pins have acpi event methods and assigns interrupt handlers that calls > the acpi event methods for those pins. > > Partially based on work by Rui Zhang <rui.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (...) > +/** > + * acpi_gpio_request_interrupt() - Register isr for gpio controller ACPI events > + * @chip: gpio chip representation of the gpio controller Hm chip, controller, controller, chip chip, controller controller... Are we using two different names for the same thing? > + * > + * ACPI5 platforms can use GPIO signaled ACPI events. These GPIO interrupts are > + * handled by ACPI event methods which need to be called from the GPIO > + * controller's interrupt handler. acpi_gpio_request_interrupt finds out which > + * gpio pins have acpi event methods and assigns interrupt handlers that calls > + * the acpi event methods for those pins. > + */ > + > +void acpi_gpio_request_interrupt(struct gpio_chip *chip) So I was like "um, what acpi requests an interrupt for a GPIO (maybe a pin)... ... read read ... Aha the function should probably be named: acpi_gpiochip_request_interrupts() Because it just grabs all IRQs coming from that chip right? Second: why is there no mirror function *releasing* all the IRQs again? One-way interface? Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
