On 01/12/14 11:23, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 11:19:41AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> Hi Russell,
>>
>> On 01/12/14 11:03, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> If all you want to do is to bypass the following check, what's wrong
>>> with actually doing that:
>>>
>>> - if (type != IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH && type != IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING)
>>> + if (gicirq >= 32 && type != IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH &&
>>> + type != IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>>
>>
>> I think that will require some additional changes to gic_configure_irq
>> (in irq-gic-common.c).
>
> I don't think so - gic_configure_irq() will treat it as a no-op as far
> as trying to configure the IRQ settings.
I agree. But that's following ARM's tradition of making PPIs
non-configurable. I seem to remember that there is at least one
occurrence of a GIC with configurable PPIs (Qualcomm, IIRC).
With this use case in mind, Liviu's patch allows an active-low interrupt
to be correctly configured as level, for example.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
