On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:51 AM Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 10:12 AM Linus Walleij [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Aug 19, 2019 at 5:07 PM Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Exactly what do you refer to when you want me to
"re-do the approach for IRQ handling"? Do you mean
this driver or are you referring to:

commit e0d89728981393b7d694bd3419b7794b9882c92d
Author: Thierry Reding [off-list ref]
Date:   Tue Nov 7 19:15:54 2017 +0100

    gpio: Implement tighter IRQ chip integration

    Currently GPIO drivers are required to add the GPIO chip and its
    corresponding IRQ chip separately, which can result in a lot of
    boilerplate. Use the newly introduced struct gpio_irq_chip, embedded in
    struct gpio_chip, that drivers can fill in if they want the GPIO core
    to automatically register the IRQ chip associated with a GPIO chip.

    Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding [off-list ref]
    Acked-by: Grygorii Strashko [off-list ref]
    Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij [off-list ref]

Yes.

OK let's fix this mess, it shouldn't be too hard, I've sent a first
few patches.

quoted

The problem comes from the problem/mess I am trying to
clean up in the first place. So if the new way of registering GPIO
irqchips is not working for ACPI, then we have to fix that instead
of reverting all attempts to use the new API IMO.

Sorry for me being impatient and asking for a groundless requests.
I'll help you with cleaning this.

Sorry if I sounded harsh :( I just have a bit of panic.

I am sure we can fix this, I only recently realized what a headache
the new API is going to be if I can't straighten it out and have to
keep the old stuff around forever in parallel.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel