Re: [PATCH 1/2] regmap-irq: use mask and val rather than usingmask_buf_def

[Mark Brown]

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 07:08:15AM +0000, Kim, Milo wrote:

Fix your mailer to word wrap within paragraphs, I have reformatted your
mail for legibility.

> Which is better understandable terminology ? 'mask and value' or
> 'default mask and updated mask' I think 'mask & value' is more clear.

But you need to say which value we're talking about - there's multiple
values we're working with here, the interrupt mask is only one of them.
We also have the wake masks and the actual interrupt status values for
example.

> (b) supporting interrupt-unmasked device
> There is different interrupt concept from interrupt-masked device.
> To enable the IRQ, the register bit should be 1.
> To update this value, the bit of IRQ value should be separated from the mask bit.

The variable you're changing isn't the interrupt value, it's the virtual
copy of the mask registers.  The interrupt status value is managed
separately.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature