| Message ID | 20170526180609.2699-3-uwe@kleine-koenig.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 05/26/2017 08:06 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > According to the binding documentation and the source code the atmel-gpio > controller takes IRQ_TYPE_* as its flags values, not GPIO_ACTIVE_*. > > This patch uses the right variable type which yields the same result > when compiled. Note that this might be wrong and actually > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW is intended by the dt author. > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@kleine-koenig.org> > --- > Hello, > > can somebody with the hardware or it's documentation please check which > flag is the right one? It's correct, I tested the CAN, so: Acked-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> > Best regards > Uwe > > arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi > index b5a5a91bc2ef..b813fdfa2842 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi > @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ > reg = <0>; > clocks = <&clk20m>; > interrupt-parent = <&pioE>; > - interrupts = <6 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > + interrupts = <6 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; > spi-max-frequency = <10000000>; > }; > > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ > reg = <1>; > clocks = <&clk20m>; > interrupt-parent = <&pioE>; > - interrupts = <7 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > + interrupts = <7 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; > spi-max-frequency = <10000000>; > }; > }; >
On 26/05/2017 at 21:17:37 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 05/26/2017 08:06 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > According to the binding documentation and the source code the atmel-gpio > > controller takes IRQ_TYPE_* as its flags values, not GPIO_ACTIVE_*. > > > > This patch uses the right variable type which yields the same result > > when compiled. Note that this might be wrong and actually > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW is intended by the dt author. > > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@kleine-koenig.org> > > --- > > Hello, > > > > can somebody with the hardware or it's documentation please check which > > flag is the right one? > > It's correct, I tested the CAN, so: > > Acked-by: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de> > > > Best regards > > Uwe > > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > Applied, thanks.
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi index b5a5a91bc2ef..b813fdfa2842 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ reg = <0>; clocks = <&clk20m>; interrupt-parent = <&pioE>; - interrupts = <6 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; + interrupts = <6 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; spi-max-frequency = <10000000>; }; @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ reg = <1>; clocks = <&clk20m>; interrupt-parent = <&pioE>; - interrupts = <7 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; + interrupts = <7 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>; spi-max-frequency = <10000000>; }; };
According to the binding documentation and the source code the atmel-gpio controller takes IRQ_TYPE_* as its flags values, not GPIO_ACTIVE_*. This patch uses the right variable type which yields the same result when compiled. Note that this might be wrong and actually IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW is intended by the dt author. Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@kleine-koenig.org> --- Hello, can somebody with the hardware or it's documentation please check which flag is the right one? Best regards Uwe arch/arm/boot/dts/at91-sama5d4_ma5d4.dtsi | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)