From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexandre Torgue Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/9] drivers: irqchip: Add STM32 external interrupts support Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 14:40:17 +0200 Message-ID: <053a37f4-aa10-46ea-f477-8ae55bb5773f@st.com> References: <1473432124-6784-1-git-send-email-alexandre.torgue@st.com> <1473432124-6784-3-git-send-email-alexandre.torgue@st.com> <6941f61d-0b33-4108-0135-b11887cd0488@st.com> <39c4ceee-7e05-ebfd-2ea0-3c4e1c4ea619@st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx07-00178001.pphosted.com ([62.209.51.94]:9471 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751124AbcITMlK (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 08:41:10 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Thompson , Jason Cooper , arnd@arndb.de, Marc Zyngier , bruherrera@gmail.com, Linus Walleij , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Maxime Coquelin , lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Thomas, On 09/20/2016 11:51 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 20 Sep 2016, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >>> On 09/14/2016 03:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>> 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 > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754271AbcITMlM (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 08:41:12 -0400 Received: from mx07-00178001.pphosted.com ([62.209.51.94]:9471 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751124AbcITMlK (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Sep 2016 08:41:10 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/9] drivers: irqchip: Add STM32 external interrupts support To: Thomas Gleixner References: <1473432124-6784-1-git-send-email-alexandre.torgue@st.com> <1473432124-6784-3-git-send-email-alexandre.torgue@st.com> <6941f61d-0b33-4108-0135-b11887cd0488@st.com> <39c4ceee-7e05-ebfd-2ea0-3c4e1c4ea619@st.com> CC: Mark Rutland , , Daniel Thompson , Jason Cooper , , Marc Zyngier , , Linus Walleij , , , Rob Herring , Maxime Coquelin , , From: Alexandre Torgue Message-ID: <053a37f4-aa10-46ea-f477-8ae55bb5773f@st.com> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 14:40:17 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.48.0.2] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2016-09-20_05:,, signatures=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Thomas, On 09/20/2016 11:51 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 20 Sep 2016, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >>> On 09/14/2016 03:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>> 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 > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: alexandre.torgue@st.com (Alexandre Torgue) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 14:40:17 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v5 2/9] drivers: irqchip: Add STM32 external interrupts support In-Reply-To: References: <1473432124-6784-1-git-send-email-alexandre.torgue@st.com> <1473432124-6784-3-git-send-email-alexandre.torgue@st.com> <6941f61d-0b33-4108-0135-b11887cd0488@st.com> <39c4ceee-7e05-ebfd-2ea0-3c4e1c4ea619@st.com> Message-ID: <053a37f4-aa10-46ea-f477-8ae55bb5773f@st.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Thomas, On 09/20/2016 11:51 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 20 Sep 2016, Alexandre Torgue wrote: >>> On 09/14/2016 03:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>> 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 >