[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E69253F.3090705@ladisch.de>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 22:27:43 +0200
From: Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>
To: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>,
Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@...fusion.mobi>,
Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>,
Ondrej Zary <linux@...nbow-software.org>,
Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>,
Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 02/62] mpu401:snd_mpu401_uart_new(): split semantic
of irq_flags
Yong Zhang wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 03:58:45PM +0200, Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> > ...
> > Here, "no interrupt" and "already reserved" actually mean the same thing,
> > i.e., that the interrupt handling is the responsibility of some other
> > driver.
Sorry, after checking the code, I've realized that my description was
wrong. irq_flags==0 ("already reserved") means that snd_mpu401_uart_new
should not try to allocate the interrupt, while irq==-1 ("no interrupt")
means that the device never issues mpu401 interrupts, so that the mpu401
code must use a timer to poll the device.
I'll write a patch that changes this function so that irq<0 means
"already reserved", and that "no interrupt" gets another bit in the
info_flags parameter.
Regards,
Clemens
--
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