linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: max732x: Add IRQF

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5537FC21.9050602@mentor.com>
Date:	Wed, 22 Apr 2015 22:53:05 +0300
From:	Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
To:	Semen Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...ballogic.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
CC:	<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: max732x: Add IRQF_SHARED to irq flags

Hi Semen,

On 21.04.2015 16:19, Semen Protsenko wrote:
> It's possible that multiple MAX732X can be hooked up to the same
> interrupt line with the processor. So add IRQF_SHARED in requesting irq.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Semen Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...ballogic.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-max732x.c |   10 ++++------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-max732x.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-max732x.c
> index 0fa4543..55b13d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-max732x.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-max732x.c
> @@ -507,12 +507,10 @@ static int max732x_irq_setup(struct max732x_chip *chip,
>  		chip->irq_features = has_irq;
>  		mutex_init(&chip->irq_lock);
>  
> -		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev,
> -					client->irq,
> -					NULL,
> -					max732x_irq_handler,
> -					IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_ONESHOT,
> -					dev_name(&client->dev), chip);
> +		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev, client->irq,
> +				NULL, max732x_irq_handler, IRQF_ONESHOT |
> +				IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_SHARED,
> +				dev_name(&client->dev), chip);

is it still the case that for shared interrupts a hard IRQ handler is
mandatory to have?

Here I rely on
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/2011-March/001118.html

With best wishes,
Vladimir

--
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/