On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 04:17:54PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [171206 19:36]: > > By the way, it seems pretty ambiguous how we want to handle things like > > (a) multiple devices sharing the same WAKE# > > (b) systems where a slot is swappable > > > > For (a), the main problem is that if we have to repeat the interrupt > > definition in multiple devices, then we have to deal with something like > > IRQF_SHARED. That can be done, but it makes it much harder to use the > > dedicated wakeirq helpers. > > This will get messy, let's not go there :) That is unless the hardware > really has a single interrupt wired to multiple devices. And in that > case almost certainly a custom interrupt handler is needed. As Rafael mentioned, the spec doesn't clearly delineate a required hierarchy to the WAKE# pin, and it's certainly possible to share it. I'm fine dodging that question for now, and only writing said custom interrupt handler if/when needed. But device tree bindings are "forever", so it seems reasonable to at least agree how it should be defined. Brian -- 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
