Kevin Hilman wrote, on 03/03/2011 05:41 AM:
Nishanth Menon<nm@xxxxxx> writes:
Request the handler irq such that there is no nesting for calls.
the notifiers are not expected to be nested, further the interrupt
events for status change should be handled prior to the next event
else there is a risk of loosing events.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon<nm@xxxxxx>
IRQs disabled interrupt handlers are soon to disappear in the kernel.
This kind of thing should be handled using locking, most likely IRQs
disabled spinlocks.
http://marc.info/?t=129906354500012&r=1&w=2
Ack.. painfully made clear in l-a as well.. dropping this :(
Kevin
---
arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c
index 1fe8b95..7931fcd 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/smartreflex.c
@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ static int sr_late_init(struct omap_sr *sr_info)
goto error;
}
ret = request_irq(sr_info->irq, sr_interrupt,
- 0, name, (void *)sr_info);
+ IRQF_DISABLED, name, (void *)sr_info);
if (ret)
goto error;
}
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
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
