[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51F68FB0.4090507@overkiz.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:52:16 +0200
From: boris brezillon <b.brezillon@...rkiz.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC: Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: at91: choose appropriate handler for level interrupts
On 29/07/2013 17:42, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Boris BREZILLON
> <b.brezillon@...rkiz.com> wrote:
>
>> The current implementation handle both edge and level interrupts with the
>> 'handle_simple_irq' handler.
>>
>> Level interrupts are active as long as the pin stays at the configured
>> level (low or high). In this case we have to use 'handle_level_irq' which
>> mask the interrupt until the handle has treated it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon@...rkiz.com>
> Nicolas/Jean-Christophe: any opinion on this patch?
>
> I am tempted to just apply it and see if you react to it :-)
Hello,
Just for clarification, without this patch the kernel hangs if you request a
threaded irq on level state (low or high).
This was tested on sama5ek board.
Best Regards,
Boris
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
--
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