From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932192AbbELHec (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2015 03:34:32 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f43.google.com ([209.85.218.43]:36542 "EHLO mail-oi0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752668AbbELHe3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2015 03:34:29 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1429637257-11055-1-git-send-email-semen.protsenko@globallogic.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 09:34:28 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpio: max732x: Propagate wake-up setting to parent irq controller From: Linus Walleij To: Sam Protsenko Cc: Alexandre Courbot , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Sam Protsenko wrote: > On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: >> Patch applied, but it seems we need a general approach to >> cover a few GPIO drivers with this kind of thing. >> >> Is this how we should always do it? > > I think so (well, at least it seems to be correct for GPIO expanders). But I'd > verify each particular driver to be completely sure that it's really needed and > it wouldn't create some new issues. MAX732X chip seems to be very similar to > PCF857X one, so in this particular case I'm sure that this patch is a good thing > to have. OK yeah, maybe we could provide a list of "usual suspects", what do you say about "my" expanders: drivers/gpio/gpio-stmpe.c drivers/gpio/gpio-tc3589x.c I can surely patch and test these. Yours, Linus Walleij