Re: [PATCH] pinctrl-baytrail: fix for irq descriptor conflict on ASUS T100TA

[Linus Walleij]

On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Jin, Yao <yao.jin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2014/4/26 11:04, Jin, Yao wrote:
(...)
> I think we still need a small modification on pinctrl-baytrail.c, that
> is moving gpiochip_add forward, otherwise the to_irq method is not set.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c
> b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c
> index e599834..fdfb84b 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-baytrail.c
> @@ -491,12 +491,6 @@ static int byt_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         gc->can_sleep = false;
>         gc->dev = dev;
>
> -       ret = gpiochip_add(gc);
> -       if (ret) {
> -               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed adding byt-gpio chip\n");
> -               return ret;
> -       }
> -
>         /* set up interrupts  */
>         irq_rc = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_IRQ, 0);
>         if (irq_rc && irq_rc->start) {
> @@ -514,6 +508,12 @@ static int byt_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>                 irq_set_chained_handler(hwirq, byt_gpio_irq_handler);
>         }
>
> +       ret = gpiochip_add(gc);
> +       if (ret) {
> +               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed adding byt-gpio chip\n");
> +               return ret;
> +       }
> +

Now I feel I'm not following what combo of patches solves the
problem any more.

Do you mean you think that this patch combined with Thomas'
will solve the root cause?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/