Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2016-03-19 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > On 22/12/15 11:18, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >> On 12/17/2015 12:48 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >>> Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt >>> controllers, may require require additional runtime

Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2016-03-19 Thread Geert Uytterhoeven
On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > On 22/12/15 11:18, Grygorii Strashko wrote: >> On 12/17/2015 12:48 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >>> Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt >>> controllers, may require require additional runtime power management >>>

Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-22 Thread Jon Hunter
On 22/12/15 11:18, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > On 12/17/2015 12:48 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >> Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt >> controllers, may require require additional runtime power management >> control to ensure they are accessible. For such IRQ chips, it

Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-22 Thread Grygorii Strashko
On 12/17/2015 12:48 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt > controllers, may require require additional runtime power management > control to ensure they are accessible. For such IRQ chips, it makes sense > to enable the IRQ chip when

Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-22 Thread Grygorii Strashko
On 12/17/2015 12:48 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: > Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt > controllers, may require require additional runtime power management > control to ensure they are accessible. For such IRQ chips, it makes sense > to enable the IRQ chip when

Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-22 Thread Jon Hunter
On 22/12/15 11:18, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > On 12/17/2015 12:48 PM, Jon Hunter wrote: >> Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt >> controllers, may require require additional runtime power management >> control to ensure they are accessible. For such IRQ chips, it

Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-17 Thread Linus Walleij
Adding linux-gpio, so quoting in full. On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: > Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt > controllers, may require require additional runtime power management > control to ensure they are accessible. For such IRQ chips,

[RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-17 Thread Jon Hunter
Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt controllers, may require require additional runtime power management control to ensure they are accessible. For such IRQ chips, it makes sense to enable the IRQ chip when interrupts are requested and disabled them again once all

Re: [RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-17 Thread Linus Walleij
Adding linux-gpio, so quoting in full. On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: > Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt > controllers, may require require additional runtime power management > control to ensure they are

[RFC PATCH V2 2/8] irqdomain: Don't set type when mapping an IRQ

2015-12-17 Thread Jon Hunter
Some IRQ chips, such as GPIO controllers or secondary level interrupt controllers, may require require additional runtime power management control to ensure they are accessible. For such IRQ chips, it makes sense to enable the IRQ chip when interrupts are requested and disabled them again once all