On 9/20/17 6:43 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:

Doesn't that mean we need something like irq_valid_mask but rather
gpio_valid_mask that just block all usage of certain GPIOs?

That raises a lot of questions.  In the meantime, my current patches for 
4.14 work fine.

Do we replace irq_valid_mask with gpio_valid_mask?  That would break 
drivers where the GPIO is valid but the interrupt is not.  If we keep 
both, what happens if gpio_valid_mask is false but irq_valid_mask is 
true?  And then we would need to audit all gpio drivers to see which 
ones should be updated for the new infrastructure.

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.