On 03/25/2014 10:26 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 03/25/2014 09:45 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior >> <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Since Alan said that he had drop two patches from earlier series to make >>> it work I decided to spent some extra time to check if this is really the >>> case. >>> I dropped "gpio: dwapb: do not create the irq mapping upfront." until the >>> discussion there is over. >>> >>> This series has been tested back ported and tested on a v3.13 kernel with >>> the dummy test [0] here. It was tested on the Arrow board and the dev kit. I >>> tested edge and level interrupts. On the Arrow board releasing the button >>> causes a lot of interrupts so I assume debouncing is no working well >>> there. On the dev kit I see only one interrupt. If I realse it really >>> slowly, then the extra interrupts are visible there as well but way less. >>> >>> [0] http://breakpoint.cc/gpio-dwapb-test.c >> >> Okay so can we have Jamie and Sebastian H. have a look at this >> series? > > I'd love to test it and have a closer look, but we are way behind on > gpio and especially gpio irqs on mach-berlin. > > I will look at the patches, but I guess if it doesn't break socfpga > or any other user of it, it is fine. Except a small comment about for loop in 6/7 the dwapb related patches look good to me. Sebastian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html