On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote:
> otherwise we could get our IRQ line disabled due
> to many spurious IRQs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> index fc5b8bc..5b78a73 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> @@ -1015,7 +1015,7 @@ omap_i2c_isr(int this_irq, void *dev_id)
> }
> } while (stat);
>
> - return count ? IRQ_HANDLED : IRQ_NONE;
> + return IRQ_HANDLED;
no sure if this is correct. if you have IRQ flood and instead of _actually_
handling it, if you return handled, you still have interrupt pending, right?
if (count++ == 100) {
dev_warn(dev->dev, "Too much work in one IRQ\n");
break;
}
ofcourse we do get warning message already, so as such the change
should be fine.
Just want to understand the change bit more.
Regards
Santosh
Regards
santosh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
