Hi,
On 1/20/21 8:59 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 9:18 PM Hans de Goede hdegoede@redhat.com wrote:
On 1/18/21 2:34 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 02:13:50PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
More in general I'm not aware of any (recent-ish) x86 GPIO controllers not being able to do active low interrupts. In theory we could hit this code path on ARM devices using ACPI enumeration, but I don't think it is likely we will see a combination of ARM + ACPI enumeration + WM5102 + GPIO controller not capable of active-low interrupts.
I've not seen this issue on any ARM based systems.
This overriding of the flags definitely is necessary on the Lenovo devices in question. I could add a "if (dmi_name_in_vendors("LENOVO"))" guard around it, but that seems unnecessary.
Possibly just an update to the comment to make it clear that some firmwares might legitimately set the flag?
Ok, I've extended the comment above the override of the irq-flags with the following paragraph for v4 of this patch-set:
* Note theoretically it is possible that some boards are not capable * of handling active low level interrupts. In that case setting the * flag to IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING would not be a bug (and we would need * to work around this) but sofar all known usages of IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLINGso far
* are a bug in the boards DSDT.board's
Thank you for the quick review, I've fixed both spelling errors for the upcoming v4.
Regards,
Hans