On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 09:07:29AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 02:09:16PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > + int data_irq;
> > + int pd_irq;
> Maybe make irqs unsigned?
I guess.
> > +static void wm831x_ts_input_close(struct input_dev *idev)
> > +{
> > + struct wm831x_ts *wm831x_ts = input_get_drvdata(idev);
> > + struct wm831x *wm831x = wm831x_ts->wm831x;
> > +
> > + wm831x_set_bits(wm831x, WM831X_TOUCH_CONTROL_1,
> > + WM831X_TCH_ENA | WM831X_TCH_CVT_ENA |
> > + WM831X_TCH_X_ENA | WM831X_TCH_Y_ENA |
> > + WM831X_TCH_Z_ENA, 0);
> > +
> > + if (wm831x_ts->pen_down)
> > + disable_irq_nosync(wm831x_ts->data_irq);
> Why nosync?
Cut'n'paste from the pen up handling in the data IRQ (which obviously
does need to be nosync due to the fact that it runs from IRQ context).
> > + input_dev = input_allocate_device();
> Are we 100% sure it is impossible for the 2 irqs above to fire up before
> we get here? Like if we happen to have hardware in half-active state
> while binding?
It's spectacularly unlikely - in the sort of hardware this device is
useful for nothing below Linux would realistically want to talk to the
touchscreen and since the IRQs are threaded they can't be shared.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
