INTR_POLARITY_BOTH_EDGES?

[Gary Jennejohn]

On Tue, 30 Jun 2020 11:22:42 +0300
Andriy Gapon <avg at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> What do you think about adding this to intr_polarity ?
> I think that it's useful for two reasons:
> - support for GPIO interrupts of that kind (GPIO_INTR_EDGE_BOTH)
> - symmetry with ACPI's ACPI_ACTIVE_BOTH (which probably exists for GPIO as well)
> This new polarity is to be valid only with INTR_TRIGGER_EDGE as the name (and
> sanity) implies.
> 
> By the way, the name is a open for bikeshedding.
>

Seems reasonable, but to my embedded-software developer's ear INTR_ACTIVE_BOTH_EDGES
makes more sense.  I mean, a signal may have a polarity, but an interrupt does not.

-- 
Gary Jennejohn