[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d666c2eb-8193-6c63-c379-181482607a9e@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 16:59:48 +0530
From: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] usb: ohci-da8xx: add vbus and overcurrent gpios
Hi Bartosz,
On 05/02/19 3:55 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> +static irqreturn_t ohci_da8xx_oc_handler(int irq, void *data)
> +{
> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci = data;
> +
> + if (gpiod_get_value_cansleep(da8xx_ohci->oc_gpio))
> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(da8xx_ohci->vbus_gpio, 0);
> +
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> +}
Its pretty strange to see gpiod_get_value_cansleep() being called from
irq context, although I agree right now it uses SoC GPIOs so it should
actually never sleep.
Isn't it better to use gpiod_get_value() instead so you get a warning on
incorrect usage?
Thanks,
Sekhar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists