Quoting tengfeif@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (2019-06-11 03:41:26)
> On 2019-06-10 22:51, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Linus Walleij (2019-06-07 14:08:10)
> >> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 8:52 AM Tengfei Fan <tengfeif@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > The gpio interrupt status bit is getting set after the
> >> > irq is disabled and causing an immediate interrupt after
> >> > enablling the irq, so clear status bit on irq_unmask.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Tengfei Fan <tengfeif@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> This looks pretty serious, can one of the Qcom maintainers ACK
> >> this?
> >>
> >> Should it be sent to fixes and even stable?
> >>
> >> Fixes: tag?
> >>
> >
> > How is the interrupt status bit getting set after the irq is disabled?
> > It looks like this is a level type interrupt? I thought that after
> > commit b55326dc969e ("pinctrl: msm: Really mask level interrupts to
> > prevent latching") this wouldn't be a problem. Am I wrong, or is qcom
> > just clearing out patches on drivers and this is the last one that
> > needs
> > to be upstreamed?
>
> Your patch(commit b55326dc969e) can cover our issue, and my patch is no
> longer needed.
> Your patch isn't included in our code, so I submitted this patch.
Alright cool. Sounds like this patch can be dropped then and you can
pick up the patch from upstream into your vendor kernel.
