On 27-07-21, 13:16, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > This was under the assumption that we decide to still keep some > controlq request that sets the irq type and just remove the 'mask' > command.
Right, so I think I can fold all three of irq messages, mask, unmask and type, to a single message type. Where the value of type can play the role of masking/unmasking. This should work fine, I will see if I get any more doubts on this. > If we go all the way to having only one message for interrupts, I > suppose it does get a little uglier than I was hoping for, but it would still > be doable: in this case, we could allow a flow like this on the eventq: > > - driver requests edge interrupts This over eventq and .. > - (no event happened, so request remains pending) > - driver queues a new request asking for IRQ_TYPE_NONE notification > in order to mask this line This over controlq. Right ? > - device replies to both requests saying no interrupt happened Yes, that can work. > Between this control flow and the version where set-type is part of > set-direction, I would prefer the other option, but you already said > that you don't like that one. Yeah, I would like to keep this away from set-direction, which I am already going to use for activate/deactivate :) -- viresh --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
