Hi, On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 10:36 -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote: > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 06:10:56PM +0300, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote: > > On Tue, 2013-09-10 at 08:46 -0500, Josh Cartwright wrote: > > > Hey Ivan- > > > > > > Some nits below. > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 04:27:53PM +0300, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote: > [..] > > > > +static int qup_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > +{ > > > [..] > > > > + > > > > + ret = devm_request_irq(qup->dev, qup->irq, qup_i2c_interrupt, > > > > + IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH, "i2c_qup", qup); > > > > + if (ret) { > > > > + dev_err(qup->dev, "Request %d IRQ failed\n", qup->irq); > > > > + return ret; > > > > + } > > > > + > > > > + disable_irq(qup->irq); > > > > > > How is this not racy, in the case where a pending interrupt is left from > > > the bootloader (which seems to be possible based on the comments below)? > > > > Yes it looks weird. Interrupt handler will check and exit if there > > is no message for transfer. I am looking for better way to handle this. > > Below in probe() it looks like a controller reset is issued. I'm > wondering if the best way to fix this is to move that up so it happens > sooner (so we can assume here that the controller is in a > non-interrupting state). Thanks, sound reasonable. Ivan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html