Hi Stephen,
On Sunday 20 October 2013 22:35:04 Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 01:41 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:36:32 Grant Likely wrote:
> >> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:57:00 +0200, Alexander Holler wrote:
> >>> Am 12.09.2013 17:19, schrieb Stephen Warren:
>
On 10/20/2013 01:41 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Grant,
>
> On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:36:32 Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:57:00 +0200, Alexander Holler wrote:
>>> Am 12.09.2013 17:19, schrieb Stephen Warren:
IRQs, DMA channels, and GPIOs are all different things. The
* Laurent Pinchart [131020 05:41]:
> Hi Grant,
>
> On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:36:32 Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:57:00 +0200, Alexander Holler wrote:
> > > Am 12.09.2013 17:19, schrieb Stephen Warren:
> > > > IRQs, DMA channels, and GPIOs are all different things. Their bin
Hi Grant,
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:36:32 Grant Likely wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:57:00 +0200, Alexander Holler wrote:
> > Am 12.09.2013 17:19, schrieb Stephen Warren:
> > > IRQs, DMA channels, and GPIOs are all different things. Their bindings
> > > are defined independently. While it'
On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 17:57:00 +0200, Alexander Holler
wrote:
> Am 12.09.2013 17:19, schrieb Stephen Warren:
> >
> > IRQs, DMA channels, and GPIOs are all different things. Their bindings
> > are defined independently. While it's good to define new types of
> > bindings consistently with other bind
Am 12.09.2013 17:19, schrieb Stephen Warren:
IRQs, DMA channels, and GPIOs are all different things. Their bindings
are defined independently. While it's good to define new types of
bindings consistently with other bindings, this hasn't always happened,
so you can make zero assumptions about the
On 09/12/2013 05:37 AM, Alexander Holler wrote:
> Am 12.09.2013 13:26, schrieb Alexander Holler:
>> Am 12.09.2013 13:09, schrieb Alexander Holler:
>>> Am 12.09.2013 12:28, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 12.09.2013 12:11, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
> On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Alexander H
Am 12.09.2013 13:26, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 12.09.2013 13:09, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 12.09.2013 12:28, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 12.09.2013 12:11, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Alexander Holler wrote:
...
So, if I understood the code correctly t
Am 12.09.2013 13:09, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 12.09.2013 12:28, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 12.09.2013 12:11, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Alexander Holler wrote:
...
By the way, how do you define two GPIOs/IRQs from different
gpio-banks/irq-controllers wut
Am 12.09.2013 12:28, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 12.09.2013 12:11, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Alexander Holler wrote:
...
By the way, how do you define two GPIOs/IRQs from different
gpio-banks/irq-controllers wuth that scheme?
That is indeed a very good que
Am 12.09.2013 12:11, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Alexander Holler wrote:
...
By the way, how do you define two GPIOs/IRQs from different
gpio-banks/irq-controllers wuth that scheme?
That is indeed a very good question and I don't have a definite answer.
Woul
On 09/12/2013 10:55 AM, Alexander Holler wrote:
> Am 11.09.2013 19:42, schrieb Alexander Holler:
>> Am 11.09.2013 18:14, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
>
>>> So for example in an OMAP board DT you can define something like this:
>>>
>>> ethernet@5,0 {
>>> compatible = "smsc,lan9221", "
Am 11.09.2013 19:42, schrieb Alexander Holler:
> Am 11.09.2013 18:14, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
>> So for example in an OMAP board DT you can define something like this:
>>
>> ethernet@5,0 {
>> compatible = "smsc,lan9221", "smsc,lan9115";
>> interrupt-parent = <&gpio6>;
>
Am 11.09.2013 18:14, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
On 09/11/2013 05:30 PM, Alexander Holler wrote:
Am 22.08.2013 00:02, schrieb Linus Walleij:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
On Wednesday 31 July 2013 01:44:53 Linus Walleij wrote:
I don't see how sharing works
On 09/11/2013 05:30 PM, Alexander Holler wrote:
> Am 22.08.2013 00:02, schrieb Linus Walleij:
>> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Laurent Pinchart
>> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday 31 July 2013 01:44:53 Linus Walleij wrote:
>>
I don't see how sharing works here, or how another user, i.e. another o
Am 22.08.2013 00:02, schrieb Linus Walleij:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Laurent Pinchart
> wrote:
>> On Wednesday 31 July 2013 01:44:53 Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>>> I don't see how sharing works here, or how another user, i.e. another one
>>> than the user wanting to recieve the IRQ, can va
Am 11.09.2013 09:30, schrieb Alexander Holler:
And another small update. ;)
Am 11.09.2013 09:16, schrieb Alexander Holler:
To summarize what happens if a driver uses a gpio as irq:
gpio_request() // This works only if the gpio was not requested before
gpio_direction_input()
gpio_to_irq() // T
And another small update. ;)
Am 11.09.2013 09:16, schrieb Alexander Holler:
To summarize what happens if a driver uses a gpio as irq:
gpio_request() // This works only if the gpio was not requested before
gpio_direction_input()
gpio_to_irq() // This needs an irq-mapping
request_threaded_irq()
Am 11.09.2013 09:05, schrieb Alexander Holler:
Am 10.09.2013 17:00, schrieb Joel Fernandes:
I think your initial patch is much better than fixing up DT but then I
may be
missing other problems with your patch that Linus's patch addresses.
The initial patch had the problem that it not only did
Am 10.09.2013 17:00, schrieb Joel Fernandes:
I think your initial patch is much better than fixing up DT but then I may be
missing other problems with your patch that Linus's patch addresses.
The initial patch had the problem that it not only did introduce
irq-mappings for only those gpios wh
On 09/10/2013 05:00 PM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On 09/10/2013 08:17 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> On 09/10/2013 09:00 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>>> On 07/31/2013 03:35 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
On 07/31/2013 01:44 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 A
On 09/10/2013 10:48 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 09/10/2013 05:00 PM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> On 09/10/2013 08:17 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>>> On 09/10/2013 09:00 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
On 07/31/2013 03:35 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 01:44
On 09/10/2013 08:17 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 09/10/2013 09:00 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> On 07/31/2013 03:35 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>>> On 07/31/2013 01:44 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely
wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29,
On 09/10/2013 09:00 AM, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 03:35 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> On 07/31/2013 01:44 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely
>>> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij
wrote:
> To solve thi
On 07/31/2013 03:35 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 01:44 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely
>> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij
>>> wrote:
To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check
Hi Linus,
Sorry for the late reply.
On Thursday 22 August 2013 00:02:39 Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Wednesday 31 July 2013 01:44:53 Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> I don't see how sharing works here, or how another user, i.e. another one
> >>
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Laurent Pinchart
wrote:
> On Wednesday 31 July 2013 01:44:53 Linus Walleij wrote:
>> I don't see how sharing works here, or how another user, i.e. another one
>> than the user wanting to recieve the IRQ, can validly request such a line?
>> What would the usecase
Hi Linus,
On Wednesday 31 July 2013 01:44:53 Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check
> >> when adding a GPIO chip: if the chip is both gp
Am Mittwoch, 31. Juli 2013, 01:44:53 schrieb Linus Walleij:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely
wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij
wrote:
> >> To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check
> >> when adding a GPIO chip: if the chip is both gpio-
Am 02.08.2013 17:35, schrieb Alexander Holler:
> Am 02.08.2013 11:57, schrieb Alexander Holler:
>
>> There must have been a bug in the patch too. I've also added that
>> iinterrupt-parent stuff (with the same flags as used by the driver) and
>> just have let the driver call
>>
>> request_threaded_
Am 02.08.2013 11:57, schrieb Alexander Holler:
> There must have been a bug in the patch too. I've also added that
> iinterrupt-parent stuff (with the same flags as used by the driver) and
> just have let the driver call
>
> request_threaded_irq(gpio_to_irq(gpio), flags);
>
> without the gpio_re
Am 31.07.2013 10:35, schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
The problem is that board files and drivers that has not not been completed
migrated to DT assumes (at least for OMAP) that *every* GPIO line is mapped as
an IRQ and they just do:
gpio_request(gpio,...);
gpio_direction_input()
request[_thr
On 07/31/2013 01:44 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij
>> wrote:
>>> To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check
>>> when adding a GPIO chip: if the chip is both gpio-controller and
>
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij
> wrote:
>> To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check
>> when adding a GPIO chip: if the chip is both gpio-controller and
>> interrupt-controller, walk all children of the de
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> To solve this dilemma, perform an interrupt consistency check
> when adding a GPIO chip: if the chip is both gpio-controller and
> interrupt-controller, walk all children of the device tree,
> check if these in turn reference the interrupt-co
NOTE: THIS PATCH IS UNFINISHED AND UNTESTED AND THE ONLY
INTENTION IS TO SHOWCASE MY DESIRED APPROACH, IT WILL NOT
TRAVERSE THE DT INTERRUPTS PROPERLY AS OF NOW. PLEASE LET US
JUST DISCUSS THIS APPROACH.
Currently the kernel are ambigously treating GPIOs and interrupts
from a GPIO controller: GPIO
36 matches
Mail list logo
