On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 05:05 -0600, Taneja, Archit wrote: > Hi, > <snip> > One strange thing I see though is the increment with and without printks > in the irq handler in both the cases. I always see increments of 2 when > I put prints. I see 3 when I don't. That's a bit peculiar. Hmm. That's probably because prints make it slower. TE_TRIGGER and VC0_IRQ probably happen at different times. If you have printks, they are combined into one interrupt. If no printk, the code is faster and handles them separately. > Behavior looks as expected. I guess we can go without DSS_IRQSTATUS > then. Should I send out a patch? Also, should we remove DSS_IRQSTATUS in > totality from the code now? Ok. Yes, please send a patch. Is DSS_IRQSTATUS used anywhere after the patch? I guess not. But let's leave the define there, as the register still exists. Tomi -- 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
