On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 11:41:13AM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:Agreed - I think its safest to say "you're shooting yourself in the foot," rather than reinforcing what we think are the right pad settings.
Hi Mika,Fair enough :)
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:49:43AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 03:47:01PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote:I'd keep the warn though, as it most likely shows a buggy firmware
Direct Irq En bit can be initialized to a bad value.+Eric
This bit has to be cleared for io access mode.
I would like to have a bit better explanation *why* this bit needs to be
Also want to ask Eric (who added the WARN()), is there something
preventing us to do this? I remember last time you said that we are not
supposed to change this bit runtime.
My preference is that we get rid of the WARN() and just unconditionally
clear the bit.
Maybe it could be more informative.