Yufeng Shen wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Nick Dyer <nick.dyer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>> Make the irqflags default to be IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING if no platform data is >>>>> provided. >>> >>> I think if there is no platform data we should use 0 as IRQ falgs and >>> assume that IRQ line is properly configured by the board code or via >>> device tree. >> >> Benson/Yufeng - do you still have a requirement to probe without platform >> data or device tree? I'm just merging in some changes to add device tree >> support, and it would simplify things a bit if I can drop this patch. > > It has been working for quite a while for boards/devices that don't > provide platform data. If we drop the default IRQ flags, sure we can add > code for each board to configure the IRQ separately, but that's just > adding extra work. Is there strong reason why we should not do the > default setting in the driver if it is not already configured in > platform data? OK, I will keep it in my tree for the moment, since you are using it. The reason I checked is that in general, I would like to be conservative about what is pushed upstream, because it will need maintaining for a long time. The other reason is that in fact Atmel recommend IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW for these chips, not IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING, so there is a bit of an inconsistency here. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
