Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: add hym8563 binding
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 02:46:11PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Am Montag, 2. Dezember 2013, 14:41:10 schrieb Mark Brown: > > On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 08:47:42PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > > +Required properties: > > > +- compatible: should be: "haoyu,hym8563" > > > +- reg: i2c address > > > +- gpios: alarm interrupt gpio > > Why is this specified as a GPIO and not as an interrupt? > > sorry for the late reply, but it seems I got somehow droppen from your > recipient list, so just found this mail on the mailinglist. Your mail had reply to set on it. > In v1 I specified the interrupt and the gpio. Apart from the resulting > duplication of information this also resulted in the gpio only being > requested > but never used itself, which Mark Rutland did not seem to like this much :-) . > > As I'd like to keep the sanity check that really requesting the interrupt > gpio > always provided thru a gpio. As there are other drivers going this route it > looked like an ok way to go. > So what would be the real way to go? Specify only the interrupt, only the > gpio > or both? Specify only the interrupt if it's genuinely an interrupt - requiring a GPIO is broken as not all interrupt controllers are also GPIOs. There are some OMAP drivers that are broken in this regard but they shouldn't be doing that. Only use a GPIO specifier if it's used as a GPIO. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: add hym8563 binding
On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 02:46:11PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: Am Montag, 2. Dezember 2013, 14:41:10 schrieb Mark Brown: On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 08:47:42PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: +Required properties: +- compatible: should be: haoyu,hym8563 +- reg: i2c address +- gpios: alarm interrupt gpio Why is this specified as a GPIO and not as an interrupt? sorry for the late reply, but it seems I got somehow droppen from your recipient list, so just found this mail on the mailinglist. Your mail had reply to set on it. In v1 I specified the interrupt and the gpio. Apart from the resulting duplication of information this also resulted in the gpio only being requested but never used itself, which Mark Rutland did not seem to like this much :-) . As I'd like to keep the sanity check that really requesting the interrupt gpio always provided thru a gpio. As there are other drivers going this route it looked like an ok way to go. So what would be the real way to go? Specify only the interrupt, only the gpio or both? Specify only the interrupt if it's genuinely an interrupt - requiring a GPIO is broken as not all interrupt controllers are also GPIOs. There are some OMAP drivers that are broken in this regard but they shouldn't be doing that. Only use a GPIO specifier if it's used as a GPIO. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: add hym8563 binding
Hi Mark, Am Montag, 2. Dezember 2013, 14:41:10 schrieb Mark Brown: > On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 08:47:42PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > +Required properties: > > +- compatible: should be: "haoyu,hym8563" > > +- reg: i2c address > > +- gpios: alarm interrupt gpio > > Why is this specified as a GPIO and not as an interrupt? sorry for the late reply, but it seems I got somehow droppen from your recipient list, so just found this mail on the mailinglist. In v1 I specified the interrupt and the gpio. Apart from the resulting duplication of information this also resulted in the gpio only being requested but never used itself, which Mark Rutland did not seem to like this much :-) . As I'd like to keep the sanity check that really requesting the interrupt gpio provides I did go this way, as the interrupt pin of the chip is of course always provided thru a gpio. As there are other drivers going this route it looked like an ok way to go. So what would be the real way to go? Specify only the interrupt, only the gpio or both? Heiko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: add hym8563 binding
Hi Mark, Am Montag, 2. Dezember 2013, 14:41:10 schrieb Mark Brown: On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 08:47:42PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: +Required properties: +- compatible: should be: haoyu,hym8563 +- reg: i2c address +- gpios: alarm interrupt gpio Why is this specified as a GPIO and not as an interrupt? sorry for the late reply, but it seems I got somehow droppen from your recipient list, so just found this mail on the mailinglist. In v1 I specified the interrupt and the gpio. Apart from the resulting duplication of information this also resulted in the gpio only being requested but never used itself, which Mark Rutland did not seem to like this much :-) . As I'd like to keep the sanity check that really requesting the interrupt gpio provides I did go this way, as the interrupt pin of the chip is of course always provided thru a gpio. As there are other drivers going this route it looked like an ok way to go. So what would be the real way to go? Specify only the interrupt, only the gpio or both? Heiko -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: add hym8563 binding
On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 08:47:42PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: > +Required properties: > +- compatible: should be: "haoyu,hym8563" > +- reg: i2c address > +- gpios: alarm interrupt gpio Why is this specified as a GPIO and not as an interrupt? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [rtc-linux] [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: add hym8563 binding
On Sun, Dec 01, 2013 at 08:47:42PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: +Required properties: +- compatible: should be: haoyu,hym8563 +- reg: i2c address +- gpios: alarm interrupt gpio Why is this specified as a GPIO and not as an interrupt? signature.asc Description: Digital signature
