On 10/14/2021 3:38 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-10-13 01:36:54)
On 10/13/2021 1:41 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-09-16 23:33:03)
From: David Collins <collinsd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Make the support of PMIC peripheral interrupts optional for
spmi-pmic-arb devices. This is useful in situations where
SPMI address mapping is required without the need for IRQ
support.
Signed-off-by: David Collins <collinsd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
Is there a binding update? Can the binding be converted to YAML as well?
This change doesn't add/update any dtsi properties but just checking if an
existing property is present to decide if IRQ support is required, so no
binding change is needed.
The property is now optional in the binding. Please update the binding.
Right, thanks for pointing it out. I forgot that part.
I will update the binding. How about only update the interrupt properties as
optional in this series then I can come up with following patch to convert
the binding to YAML format?
1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
index 988204c..55fa981 100644
--- a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
+++ b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
@@ -1280,10 +1280,12 @@ static int spmi_pmic_arb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
goto err_put_ctrl;
}
- pmic_arb->irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "periph_irq");
- if (pmic_arb->irq < 0) {
- err = pmic_arb->irq;
- goto err_put_ctrl;
+ if (of_find_property(pdev->dev.of_node, "interrupt-names", NULL)) {
I don't think we should be keying off of interrupt-names. Instead we
should be checking for something else. Maybe interrupt-controller
property?
Sure, I can update it to check the presence of "interrupt-controller"
property.
Ok.
