Re: [PATCH -next] gpio: sl28cpld: Replace irqchip mask_invert with unmask_base

[Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 12:13 PM Aidan MacDonald
<aidanmacdonald.0x0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Following recent changes in regmap-irq, unmask registers can now
> describe inverted mask registers where a '1' bit enables an IRQ.
> Because this implements the same functionality as mask_invert and
> is more straightforward, the mask_invert flag has been deprecated.
>
> Update the driver by replacing all uses of mask_base & mask_invert
> with unmask_base.
>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> This patch depends on the "regmap-irq cleanups and refactoring" series
> which (at time of writing) is already in linux-next.
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220623211420.918875-1-aidanmacdonald.0x0@xxxxxxxxx/
>
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-sl28cpld.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-sl28cpld.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-sl28cpld.c
> index 52404736ac86..2195f88c2048 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-sl28cpld.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-sl28cpld.c
> @@ -70,8 +70,7 @@ static int sl28cpld_gpio_irq_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
>         irq_chip->num_irqs = ARRAY_SIZE(sl28cpld_gpio_irqs);
>         irq_chip->num_regs = 1;
>         irq_chip->status_base = base + GPIO_REG_IP;
> -       irq_chip->mask_base = base + GPIO_REG_IE;
> -       irq_chip->mask_invert = true;
> +       irq_chip->unmask_base = base + GPIO_REG_IE;
>         irq_chip->ack_base = base + GPIO_REG_IP;
>
>         ret = devm_regmap_add_irq_chip_fwnode(dev, dev_fwnode(dev),
>
> base-commit: 353f7988dd8413c47718f7ca79c030b6fb62cfe5
> prerequisite-patch-id: a45db1cac7537769dc10087fc61f977dc150744c
> prerequisite-patch-id: cb8aa009c7bb7a6575eb05e3af65342dc8d0efa3
> prerequisite-patch-id: 8d32557e53b894d1fb17250d2d0eb3673f068d37
> prerequisite-patch-id: 5b293867ef81e3697892ac51b941bb53680a70dc
> prerequisite-patch-id: 8138d39a4817e804141bfe8c2ad37d9c55456a40
> prerequisite-patch-id: b01216129e887519d441cf556bbc75c397871773
> prerequisite-patch-id: b5dcf0c0609113c2d81bc557c1fc95ef23f40811
> prerequisite-patch-id: 622ca1c10e851b1889aaa567c1d2a0adf43cca44
> prerequisite-patch-id: d28c5187f9bf0e43f27b2f4aa8dcf7fd91842a03
> prerequisite-patch-id: d29d54b756be73304f844abeeaf9b46a5c0119d5
> prerequisite-patch-id: 5d405790ae89c0831b46a359f86e94bac5a67470
> prerequisite-patch-id: c90120e79acbb52ffa148bfedee1df9d35b5eced
> prerequisite-patch-id: 2e35247a5cfe5a28565c9272b85fc6835011b032
> --
> 2.35.1
>

Who took the prerequisite series? Do you mind if we wait until the
next merge window with it, that way we'll simply apply it without
having to pull in other branches?

Bart