Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 12:03:44AM -0500, Arce, Abraham wrote:
>> Hi again Dmitry,
>>
>> > No worries, although at first I was surprised that Trilok spoke exactly
>> > the same words I did ;)
>> >
>>
>> :)
>>
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +/* Interrupt thread handler thread */
>> > > > > > +
>> > > > > > +static irqreturn_t omap_keypad_threaded(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> > > > > > +{
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Why is iti threaded? I fo not see anything that will sleep.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > It was implemented based on previous comments...
>> > >
>> >
>> > Would you point me to that comment? Like I said, I do not see anything
>> > that would possibly sleep in this routine so you don't need to use
>> > threaded interrupt.
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg26352.html
>>
>
> Thanks.
>
> I think Kevin meant "use theaded IRQ, wherever possible" [if we need
> to sleep in interrupt handler].
Actually, even interrupts that don't sleep can use threaded IRQs. I
prefer to see threaded IRQs wherever possible. Especially since we're
moving towards a world where all interrupts are run with interrupts
disabled, using threaded IRQs minimizes interrupts-off critical
sections.
Kevin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
