[PATCH v5 2/9] drivers: irqchip: Add STM32 external interrupts support
From: Alexandre Torgue <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-20 12:41:12
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-gpio, lkml
From: Alexandre Torgue <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-20 12:41:12
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-gpio, lkml
Thomas, On 09/20/2016 11:51 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 20 Sep 2016, Alexandre Torgue wrote:quoted
quoted
On 09/14/2016 03:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:quoted
Well, you just used some function in some context which is not relevant to the normal operation. So adding that mask() is just paranoia for no value.A gentle reminder ping... If ".free" callback is not relevant then I 'll remove it from exti domain.
Sorry for discussing about the same thing again (and again) but I just want to be sure before sending a new version. As you know I have 2 domains: EXTI domain (parent) and stm32-pinctrl-bank domain (child one). There does it make sens to have ".free" callbacks defined in both domain (actually if I define one for the child domain I have to define also ".free" callback for parent domain (EXTI) as it is hierarchical) ? If ".free" have no chance to be called then I will send a new version by removing .free callbacks (in both domain). Regards Alex
I was not talking about the .free callback in general. I was talking about the masking. But yes, if the thing is otherwise a NOOP, then you can spare it completely. Thanks, tglx