[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTilUGOVPBtdl2KB2nrbra8uBO8q4AX0v57hCtr_9@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 18:53:53 +0200
From: Esben Haabendal <esbenhaabendal@...il.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...terjones.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Esben Haabendal <eha@...edevelopment.dk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
joachim.eastwood@...ron.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq: support IRQ_NESTED_THREAD with non-threaded
interrupt handlers
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Marc Zyngier <maz@...terjones.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 15:56:01 +0200
> Esben Haabendal <esbenhaabendal@...il.com> wrote:
>
>> I have a board with an I2C PCA9535 chip with two PHY interrupt lines
>> hooked up to. The pca953x driver calls set_irq_nested_thread on all
>> irq's on initialization. The PHY driver then calls request_irq, and has
>> no idea that it should actually be using a threaded handler.
>>
>> With this patch, the PHY driver is able to work in this scenario
>> without changes (and so should any other driver using request_irq).
>
> You may want to give request_any_context_irq() a try (available since the
> latest merge window). It still requires your driver to be changed, but it
> should then work in both threaded and non-threaded cases.
The problem is not in "my" driver, but in the phy driver framework in this
particular case.
What is the plan here, should all drivers change from request_any_context_irq()
at some point in time?
/Esben
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists