On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Lars Poeschel wrote:
> On Monday 19 August 2013 at 21:35:22, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 08/17/2013 03:59 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> > Then two _example_ formats follow, preceded by following statement:
>> > The following two variants are commonly used:
>> > I
On Monday 19 August 2013 at 21:35:22, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 08/17/2013 03:59 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > [Ccing DT maintainers, as they may have some ideas as well]
> >
> > On Saturday 17 of August 2013 02:16:11 Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Tomasz Figa
wrote:
On 08/17/2013 03:59 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> [Ccing DT maintainers, as they may have some ideas as well]
>
> On Saturday 17 of August 2013 02:16:11 Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
...
>>> This is the biggest problem of this patch. It assumes that the
[Ccing DT maintainers, as they may have some ideas as well]
On Saturday 17 of August 2013 02:16:11 Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Tomasz Figa
wrote:
> >> + /* Check if we have an IRQ parent, else continue */
> >> + irq_parent = of_irq_find_parent
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On Thursday 15 of August 2013 14:12:43 Lars Poeschel wrote:
> Well, there are basically no restrictions over the format of GPIO and
> interrupt specifiers. Any driver is free to define its own and provide
> private .xlate() callback to parse i
On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> + /* Check if we have an IRQ parent, else continue */
>> + irq_parent = of_irq_find_parent(child);
>> + if (!irq_parent)
>> + continue;
>
> You can probably put the irq_parent node here
Hi Lars,
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Lars Poeschel wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij
>
> Currently the kernel is ambigously treating GPIOs and interrupts
> from a GPIO controller: GPIOs and interrupts are treated as
> orthogonal. This unfortunately makes it unclear how to actually
> retrieve a
On Thursday 15 of August 2013 14:12:43 Lars Poeschel wrote:
> On Thursday 15 August 2013 at 11:53:15, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > Hi Lars, Linus,
> >
> > On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 11:46:35 Lars Poeschel wrote:
> > > From: Linus Walleij
> > >
> > > Currently the kernel is ambigously treating GPIOs
On Thursday 15 August 2013 at 11:53:15, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Lars, Linus,
>
> On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 11:46:35 Lars Poeschel wrote:
> > From: Linus Walleij
> >
> > Currently the kernel is ambigously treating GPIOs and interrupts
> > from a GPIO controller: GPIOs and interrupts are treate
Hi Lars, Linus,
On Tuesday 13 of August 2013 11:46:35 Lars Poeschel wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij
>
> Currently the kernel is ambigously treating GPIOs and interrupts
> from a GPIO controller: GPIOs and interrupts are treated as
> orthogonal. This unfortunately makes it unclear how to actually
>
Lars Poeschel writes:
> From: Linus Walleij
>
> Currently the kernel is ambigously treating GPIOs and interrupts
> from a GPIO controller: GPIOs and interrupts are treated as
> orthogonal. This unfortunately makes it unclear how to actually
> retrieve and request a GPIO line or interrupt from a
From: Linus Walleij
Currently the kernel is ambigously treating GPIOs and interrupts
from a GPIO controller: GPIOs and interrupts are treated as
orthogonal. This unfortunately makes it unclear how to actually
retrieve and request a GPIO line or interrupt from a GPIO
controller in the device tree
12 matches
Mail list logo
