Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-24 Thread Loic Poulain
Yes I'm going to do a v3. Regards, Loic On 23/09/2014 20:36, Westerberg, Mika wrote: On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:44:43PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Loic Poulain wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-24 Thread Loic Poulain
Yes I'm going to do a v3. Regards, Loic On 23/09/2014 20:36, Westerberg, Mika wrote: On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:44:43PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Loic Poulain loic.poul...@intel.com wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-23 Thread Westerberg, Mika
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:44:43PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Loic Poulain wrote: > > > Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. > > This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. > > > > Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain > > --- > > v2: Apply over

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-23 Thread Linus Walleij
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Loic Poulain wrote: > Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. > This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. > > Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain > --- > v2: Apply over ff998356b644ebe723127bd9eec6040b59a4a4f6 + add Warning I can't figure out if the

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-23 Thread Linus Walleij
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Loic Poulain loic.poul...@intel.com wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain loic.poul...@intel.com --- v2: Apply over ff998356b644ebe723127bd9eec6040b59a4a4f6 +

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-23 Thread Westerberg, Mika
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:44:43PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Loic Poulain loic.poul...@intel.com wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread eric ernst
On 14-09-18 02:55 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:41:13AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote: Hi Mika, On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:41:13AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote: > Hi Mika, > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: > > > Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. > > > This bit has to be

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:31:35AM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: > Warn seems necessary because we unconditionally change > the pin behavior, I didn't meet any case where direct irq is truly > used on our platform. But maybe it could happen? > Don't want to cause any hidden regression. The datasheet

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Samuel Ortiz
Hi Mika, On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: > > Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. > > This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. > > +Eric > > I would like to have a bit better

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Loic Poulain
Warn seems necessary because we unconditionally change the pin behavior, I didn't meet any case where direct irq is truly used on our platform. But maybe it could happen? Don't want to cause any hidden regression. Moreover if it is confirmed that is an hardware issue (BIOS), We can just keep

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: > Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. > This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. +Eric I would like to have a bit better explanation *why* this bit needs to be cleared. Also want to ask Eric (who added the

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread eric ernst
On 14-09-18 02:55 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:41:13AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote: Hi Mika, On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. +Eric I would like to have a bit better explanation *why* this bit needs to be cleared. Also want to ask Eric (who added the

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Loic Poulain
Warn seems necessary because we unconditionally change the pin behavior, I didn't meet any case where direct irq is truly used on our platform. But maybe it could happen? Don't want to cause any hidden regression. Moreover if it is confirmed that is an hardware issue (BIOS), We can just keep

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Samuel Ortiz
Hi Mika, On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. +Eric I would like to have a bit better

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:31:35AM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: Warn seems necessary because we unconditionally change the pin behavior, I didn't meet any case where direct irq is truly used on our platform. But maybe it could happen? Don't want to cause any hidden regression. The datasheet

Re: [PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-18 Thread Mika Westerberg
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:41:13AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote: Hi Mika, On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io

[PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-17 Thread Loic Poulain
Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain --- v2: Apply over ff998356b644ebe723127bd9eec6040b59a4a4f6 + add Warning drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c | 5 - 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1

[PATCHv2] pinctrl: baytrail: Clear DIRECT_IRQ bit

2014-09-17 Thread Loic Poulain
Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value. This bit has to be cleared for io access mode. Signed-off-by: Loic Poulain loic.poul...@intel.com --- v2: Apply over ff998356b644ebe723127bd9eec6040b59a4a4f6 + add Warning drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c | 5 - 1 file changed, 4