From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72D9C43387 for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2018 20:11:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C36920855 for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2018 20:11:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="kQuTWS7A" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726787AbeL3ULn (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Dec 2018 15:11:43 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-f196.google.com ([209.85.208.196]:40780 "EHLO mail-lj1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726489AbeL3ULn (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Dec 2018 15:11:43 -0500 Received: by mail-lj1-f196.google.com with SMTP id n18-v6so22496571lji.7 for ; Sun, 30 Dec 2018 12:11:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=t7qSuNVBfEXrTGo+kbMAT8dIaSpXqZyU3nSQ8LPwQzg=; b=kQuTWS7A6G8xGnogO3TEpRTLM18rsONYWvPEWMeoHMtXuUcEK1Zbmpg/L2xQF4QUCB fY0askaJvi5rtyZm2HsoBavXxX/o4GjKFkjBGLb32Fzqz9smBEfMQiteUxAWDtQg8Fv0 wb+GlUbFPGXtImvCrc2zxfaHBfBkKFF57MnI4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=t7qSuNVBfEXrTGo+kbMAT8dIaSpXqZyU3nSQ8LPwQzg=; b=hYx4oC4AS+gXkT3lqRsjfloOY3AQVOlYPdrOXPrPCSmKxWtBCoPzuk1BVsi+H5I6Zw XbuMWOA1BW9W3uvjMhi/FMdlgbIeLcx+kdr/CzxwkU8HZzdYOznH36i86B9FernQiWr8 NOMSV+LsDhw4prXC+Pol4DfDQSk5/nxJCVKlJyliU1iVzVcdOTSOL7+1hXQFNWLsTV+L IArz+/ZQvPEigLXMxY506Bdp8PRb65Fbx5e0+S2fmOx/kJ5oAI4PclWFsRBaIKt/PIEH mPMIK3DsvyAso37FQff3LZZmarHvAaTq1yzTxq8O2QKGvEQGWL+sxBdhWaSmdJ2sDN65 YRsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukfo33NCa2wnX1bhLjsi7Qx697GG6DjhOYRq1G008N6Sn275Dqvv cB4V0cc5QzcDr2Gv26w1B9NHmG5gOz1lFDfaTpUKrQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5WeCQxKZewzWDU5MGUiyzm5jFiroTbfsd+nghU7fqHOEjgMtNvGOm6/mTRXhaDVlfQXIFA2d2iOhsGISlYsv8= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:710a:: with SMTP id m10-v6mr20202699ljc.66.1546200701088; Sun, 30 Dec 2018 12:11:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20181229114755.8711-1-masneyb@onstation.org> In-Reply-To: <20181229114755.8711-1-masneyb@onstation.org> From: Linus Walleij Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2018 21:11:29 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] qcom: spmi: add support for hierarchical IRQ chip To: Brian Masney , Stephen Boyd Cc: Bjorn Andersson , Andy Gross , Marc Zyngier , Shawn Guo , Doug Anderson , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Nicolas Dechesne , Niklas Cassel , David Brown , Rob Herring , Mark Rutland , "thierry.reding@gmail.com" , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 12:48 PM Brian Masney wrote: > This patch series adds hierarchical IRQ chip support to spmi-gpio so > that device tree consumers can request an IRQ directly from the GPIO > block rather than having to request an IRQ from the underlying PMIC. > The first patch in this series converts pmic-arb to use the version 2 > IRQ interface and patches 2 and 3 add support for the hierarchical > IRQ chip to spmi-gpio. Very nice stuff! > The patches need to be applied in the order that I have them in order > to allow for a proper bisection, however part of the series can be > applied without any breakage. Maybe the spmi-arb change can go in > for v4.21 and the spmi-gpio changes can go in for v4.22? I'm fairly sure the SPMI maintainer (Stephen Boyd) can just ACK the patch once he's happy with it and I can then apply it all to the pin control tree. > This work was tested on a LG Nexus 5 (hammerhead) phone. My status page > at https://masneyb.github.io/nexus-5-upstream/ describes what is working > so far with an upstream kernel. I'm a big fan of your work. I have a few of these devices as well, so the day I manage to create a serial cable for it, I'll gladly test this stuff and see what I can add. Yours, Linus Walleij