On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 03:44:03PM -0800, Courtney Cavin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 07:41:38PM +0100, Josh Cartwright wrote:
> > The Qualcomm PMIC Arbiter, in addition to being a basic SPMI controller,
> > also implements interrupt handling for slave devices. Note, this is
> > outside the scope of SPMI, as SPMI leaves interrupt handling completely
> > unspecified.
> >
> > Extend the driver to provide a irq_chip implementation and chained irq
> > handling which allows for these interrupts to be used.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Josh Cartwright <joshc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c | 393 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 391 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
[..]
> > +struct spmi_pmic_arb_qpnpint_type {
> > + u8 type; /* 1 -> edge */
> > + u8 polarity_high;
> > + u8 polarity_low;
> > +} __packed;
> > +
>
> While the rest of this driver uses 'pmic' or 'spmi_pmic', this patch
> adds 'qpnpint'. Can we please just leave the software fabricated name
> 'qpnp' out of any changes, as it isn't in any hardware spec? Perhaps
> 'pmic_int' or something along those lines?
QPNP is not a software-created concept. It is a hardware concept, where
it places requirements on the layout of a peripherals' register space,
and how interrupts are expected to behave, among other things.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
