* Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> [230306 07:28]: > * Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [230217 16:31]: > > On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 09:49:37 +0200 > > Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > * Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> [230216 09:38]: > > > > Convert the driver to immutable irq-chip with a bit of > > > > intuition. > > > > > > > > This driver require some special care: .irq_ack() was copied > > > > from dummy_irq_chip where it was defined as noop. This only > > > > makes sense if using handle_edge_irq() that will unconditionally > > > > call .irq_ack() to avoid a crash, but this driver is not ever > > > > using handle_edge_irq() so just avoid assigning .irq_ack(). > > > > > > > > A separate chip had to be created for the non-wakeup instance. > > > > > > Nice, works for me. > > > > > > BTW, I still see these warnings remaining on boot: > > > > > > gpio gpiochip0: Static allocation of GPIO base is deprecated, use dynamic allocation. > > > > > > Seems like we might be able to get rid of those too now or are > > > there still some dependencies with /sys/class/gpio for example? > > > > > on what are you testing? on -next? I thought I have fixed theese warning with > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=92bf78b33b0b463b00c6b0203b49aea845daecc8 > > You're right, sorry looks like I pasted the wrong line from the dmesg > output :) > > I intended to paste this example instead of the static allocation line: > > gpio gpiochip1: (gpio-32-63): not an immutable chip, please consider fixing it! Hmm, nope, sorry it seems I was just confused between two patches. Hopefully all the gpio warnings will be gone with this $subject patch applied. Regards, Tony
