Hi,
Am Freitag, 21. Juli 2023, 16:56:17 CEST schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> This is calling request_threaded_irq() but the thread parameter is NULL
> so it's actually not a threaded irq. Which is a bit misleading. Call
> request_irq() instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c index 9b7a00bafeaa..9d81dbbc6680
> 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/samsung-dsim.c
> @@ -1637,8 +1637,8 @@ static int samsung_dsim_register_te_irq(struct
> samsung_dsim *dsi, struct device
>
> te_gpio_irq = gpiod_to_irq(dsi->te_gpio);
>
> - ret = request_threaded_irq(te_gpio_irq, samsung_dsim_te_irq_handler,
NULL,
> - IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING |
IRQF_NO_AUTOEN, "TE", dsi);
> + ret = request_irq(te_gpio_irq, samsung_dsim_te_irq_handler,
> + IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_NO_AUTOEN, "TE",
dsi);
> if (ret) {
> dev_err(dsi->dev, "request interrupt failed with %d\n",
ret);
> gpiod_put(dsi->te_gpio);
This change looks good, but it seems worth using devm_ call instead (as a
separate patch probably). dsi->te_gpio is also requested per devm_ call, so
eventually samsung_dsim_unregister_te_irq could be removed if the IRQ is
device managed as well.
Despite that for this patch:
Acked-by: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
TQ-Systems GmbH | Mühlstraße 2, Gut Delling | 82229 Seefeld, Germany
Amtsgericht München, HRB 105018
Geschäftsführer: Detlef Schneider, Rüdiger Stahl, Stefan Schneider
http://www.tq-group.com/
