[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100611111326.GD12436@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:13:26 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Luotao Fu <l.fu@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mfd: add STMPE811 core support
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:13:13PM +0200, Luotao Fu wrote:
> + for_each_set_bit(bit, (unsigned long *)&int_stat, STMPE811_NUM_IRQ) {
> + handler = stm->irqhandler[bit];
> + data = stm->irqdata[bit];
> + if (handler) {
You should be using genirq here - just call handle_nested_irq() if the
IRQ is asserted and let genirq manage the handler for you.
> +static irqreturn_t stmpe811_irq(int irq, void *data)
> +{
> + struct stmpe811 *stm = data;
> +
> + get_device(stm->dev);
> + disable_irq_nosync(stm->irq);
> + queue_work(stm->work_queue, &stm->irq_work);
> +
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
You should use request_threaded_irq() for the main IRQ - it will take
care of all this for you.
> +static struct i2c_device_id stmpe811_id_table[] = {
> + {"stmpe811", 0x88},
Any reason for the 0x88 - you don't seem to use it anywhere?
> +int stmpe811_register_irq(struct stmpe811 *stm, int irq,
> + irq_handler_t handler, void *data);
> +int stmpe811_free_irq(struct stmpe811 *stm, int irq);
If you use genirq these can be dropped - this will also mean that
existing generic drivers using the standard GPIO and IRQ frameworks will
be able to use the chip without modification.
--
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