Hi,
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:13:26PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:13:13PM +0200, Luotao Fu wrote:
>
> > + for_each_set_bit(bit, (unsigned long *)&int_stat, STMPE811_NUM_IRQ) {
> > + handler = stm->irqhandler[bit];
> > + data = stm->irqdata[bit];
> > + if (handler) {
>
> You should be using genirq here - just call handle_nested_irq() if the
> IRQ is asserted and let genirq manage the handler for you.
>
ah OK, I did think about using nested irq, was however too lazy to find
out how it works. ;-). Will fix in V2.
> > +static irqreturn_t stmpe811_irq(int irq, void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct stmpe811 *stm = data;
> > +
> > + get_device(stm->dev);
> > + disable_irq_nosync(stm->irq);
> > + queue_work(stm->work_queue, &stm->irq_work);
> > +
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +}
>
> You should use request_threaded_irq() for the main IRQ - it will take
> care of all this for you.
>
>
> > +static struct i2c_device_id stmpe811_id_table[] = {
> > + {"stmpe811", 0x88},
>
> Any reason for the 0x88 - you don't seem to use it anywhere?
>
doh, this is bogus. will fix in the next round.
> > +int stmpe811_register_irq(struct stmpe811 *stm, int irq,
> > + irq_handler_t handler, void *data);
> > +int stmpe811_free_irq(struct stmpe811 *stm, int irq);
>
> If you use genirq these can be dropped - this will also mean that
> existing generic drivers using the standard GPIO and IRQ frameworks will
> be able to use the chip without modification.
all right.
Thanks
cheers
Luotao Fu
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Dipl.-Ing. Luotao Fu |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
