Re: (subset) [PATCH] mfd: rtc: bd7xxxx Drop IC name from IRQ

[Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@gmail.com>]

On 09/10/2024 17:29, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 15:01:13 +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>> A few ROHM PMICs have an RTC block which can be controlled by the
>> rtc-bd70528 driver. The RTC driver needs the alarm interrupt information
>> from the parent MFD driver. The MFD driver provides the interrupt
>> information as a set of named interrupts, where the name is of form:
>> <PMIC model>-rtc-alm-<x>, where x is an alarm block number.
>>
>> >From the RTC driver point of view it is irrelevant what the PMIC name
>> is. It is sufficient to know this is alarm interrupt for a block X. The
>> PMIC model information is carried to RTC via the platform device ID.
>> Hence, having the PMIC model in the interrupt name is only making things
>> more complex because the RTC driver needs to request differently named
>> interrupts on different PMICs, making code unnecessary complicated.
>>
>> [...]
> 
> Applied, thanks!
> 
> [1/1] mfd: rtc: bd7xxxx Drop IC name from IRQ
>        commit: cd49b605779b4fea8224650eeba70b258c5cc8cc

Hello Lee, Alexandre,

Nothing pleases me more than having this quickly merged but...
... I don't think I saw ack from Alexandre yet. Furthermore, the 
(subset) makes me wonder because I sent RTC and MFD changes in a single 
patch - which might've been a mistake...

I tried finding the cd49b605779b4fea8224650eeba70b258c5cc8cc from MFD 
tree and failed. Hence I'm a bit unsure where we are going.

Yours,
	-- Matti