Mark Brown wrote at Saturday, December 03, 2011 4:17 AM: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 03:08:40PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: > > > + switch (irqd_get_trigger_type(irq_data)) { > > + case IRQ_TYPE_NONE: > > + /* > > + * We assume the controller imposes no restrictions, > > + * so we are able to select active-high > > + */ > > + /* Fall-through */ > > + case IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH: > > + pdata->irq_active_low = false; > > + break; > > + case IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW: > > + pdata->irq_active_low = true; > > + break; > > + default: > > + dev_err(&i2c->dev, > > + "Unsupported IRQ_TYPE %x\n", > > + irqd_get_trigger_type(irq_data)); > > + return -EINVAL; > > Actually, it occurs to me that we should treat the default case in the > same way as IRQ_TYPE_NONE - even if the interrupt controller defaults to > an edge triggered mode which we can't use it might also support a level > triggered interrupt we can use. If it doesn't then we'll just fail > later on when we request the IRQ so the end result should be the same. Yes, deferring the failure to later seems reasonable; it's probably better to work somehow if the HW supports it rather than being anal about e.g. incorrect device tree content. > Don't worry about respinning for this unless the series needs to get > resent for some other reason let's just fix it incrementally (I'll do > that myself when I apply unless you want to). I'm fine if you change that when applying it. Thanks. -- nvpublic -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html