[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201007201127.57510.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:27:57 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Masayuki Ohtake" <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>
Cc: "Jean Delvare \(PC drivers, core\)" <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
"Ben Dooks \(embedded platforms\)" <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, "LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
qi.wang@...el.com, "Wang, Yong Y" <yong.y.wang@...el.com>,
joel.clark@...el.com, andrew.chih.howe.khor@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] I2C driver of Topcliff PCH
On Tuesday 20 July 2010, Masayuki Ohtake wrote:
> > > +
> > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev,
> > > + "i2c_add_adapter returns %d for channel-%d\n", ret, i);
> > > + pch_init(&adap_info->pch_data[i]);
> > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "pch_init invoked successfully\n");
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + ret = request_irq(pdev->irq, &pch_handler, IRQF_SHARED,
> > > + MODULE_NAME, adap_info);
> >
> > Similarly, you would create a new channel data structure for each channel here
> > and register it separately, and then request the interrupt with that
> > data structure as the info.
>
> With I2c multi-cahnnel IOH, IRQ number is in common.
> Thus, I think our PCH I2C driver can't be implemented like above.
If you pass IRQF_SHARED, you can register any number of handlers
for the same IRQ number using different dev pointers.
Arnd
--
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