> -----Original Message----- > From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 5:10 PM > To: Shilimkar, Santosh > Cc: Balbi Felipe (Nokia-D/Helsinki); linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Linux OMAP Mailing List; Tony > Lindgren; Koskinen Aaro (Nokia-D/Helsinki); David Brownell; Linux USB Mailing List; Anton Vorontsov; > Grazvydas Ignotas; Chikkature Rajashekar, Madhusudhan; Greg Kroah-Hartman; Mark Brown; Samuel Ortiz > Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/4] input: misc: twl4030: move to request_threaded_irq > > Hi, > > On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:31:11PM +0100, ext Shilimkar, Santosh wrote: > >In whole of the series the ISR you have converted to threads using threaded_irq are very > >small in size. They are like quick_change_handlers. So only advantage is the particular > >interrupt is masked for bit longer than with you change. > > > >I might be wrong here but it might introduce the spurious IRQ's because > >of bit of delay in the processing.What is the motive for this change ? > >Are we using this API as it suppose to be ? > > the irq chip is connected through i2c and that mandate us to handle irqs > in thread context. Now that we have kernel-wise api for that, we're just > moving towards it instead of definint our own stuff and the lockdep > shortcuts we had to put before. OK. I see your point now. Regards, Santosh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
