Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread Jonathan Cameron
On 23/07/15 15:38, Octavian Purdila wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:05 PM, wrote: >> >> Octavian Purdila writes: >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Octavian Purdila >>> wrote: Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread Octavian Purdila
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 5:05 PM, wrote: > > Octavian Purdila writes: >> >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Octavian Purdila >> wrote: >>> >>> Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have >>> interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is not a valid i2c client irq anymore, so >>> change al

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread jic23
Octavian Purdila writes: On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Octavian Purdila wrote: Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is not a valid i2c client irq anymore, so change all driver's checks accordingly. The same issue occurs when the d

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread Linus Walleij
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Octavian Purdila wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Linus Walleij > wrote: >> Me or Torvalds? >> >> This looks more like a Wolfram patch to me if it should not >> go through IIO. >> > > Hi Linus, > > This patch fixes one issue introduced by "i2c / ACPI:

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread Alexandre Belloni
On 23/07/2015 at 15:11:47 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote : > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Octavian Purdila > wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Octavian Purdila > > wrote: > >> Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have > >> interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is not a v

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread Octavian Purdila
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Octavian Purdila > wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Octavian Purdila >> wrote: >>> Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have >>> interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is not a valid

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread Linus Walleij
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Octavian Purdila wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Octavian Purdila > wrote: >> Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have >> interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is not a valid i2c client irq anymore, so >> change all driver's checks accor

Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-07-23 Thread Octavian Purdila
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:59 PM, Octavian Purdila wrote: > Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have > interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is not a valid i2c client irq anymore, so > change all driver's checks accordingly. > > The same issue occurs when the device is instantiated

[PATCH v3 1/2] iio: fix drivers that consider 0 as a valid IRQ in client->irq

2015-06-05 Thread Octavian Purdila
Since patch "i2c / ACPI: Use 0 to indicate that device does not have interrupt assigned" [1], 0 is not a valid i2c client irq anymore, so change all driver's checks accordingly. The same issue occurs when the device is instantiated via device tree with no IRQ, or from the i2c sysfs interface, even