On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I thought about it tonight, and I need to add one more thing > to make the solution perfect: avoid registering the interrupt > with IRQF_ONESHOT. After a bunch of tests it appears that this is actually all that is needed. The interrupt core will re-wake the thread if a second IRQ came in to the hardirq (top half) during the processing of the thread. As we're checking status and dealing with shared interrupts this makes sure we never miss events. > Then we need the top half to tell the bottom half that a new > IRQ has arrived. So this is not needed. Sending a v5. Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
