On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 7:23 PM, Jerome Brunet <jbru...@baylibre.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2017-06-20 at 18:37 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> Eventually gpio_to_irq() should be DELETED and replaced in full with >> the prepare/unprepare calls. > > Woahh, that's not what I meant. gpio_to_irq should stay. Getting rid of it > would > be a mess and it is a useful call. > > The gpio_irq_prepare is meant so that the consumer can tell the gpio driver it > will want to get irq from a particular gpio at some point. > > IOW, it's the consumer saying to the gpio driver "please do whatever you need > to > do, if anything, so this gpio can generate an interrupt" > > This is a much simpler change. Using devm, all we need is to put a > devm_gpio_irq_prepare(<gpio_num>) in the probe of the drivers using > gpio_to_irq. > > Mandating call to gpio_irq_prepare before any call to gpio_to_irq will be > fairly > easy. So why can't we just return the IRQ from prepare() and be done with it instead of having two calls? (Plus a third eventual unprepare()). Clocks, regulators and godknowswhat is managed by two symmetrical calls, so why shouldn't GPIO IRQs be? It would be counterintuitive to have a third call in the middle. Yours, Linus Walleij
