o lazy-disable state
This is an odd state, and confusion regularly
comes up ... I've never been a fan of having the
imperatively named disable_irq() act like a
disable_irq_at a_random_later_time_ _but_nyet(). If
one must have the latter function, clearer IMO
to name it better and have
Hello Kevin,
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 09:59:48AM -0800, ext Kevin Hilman wrote:
Eduardo Valentin eduardo.valen...@nokia.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 03:22:51PM -0800, ext Kevin Hilman wrote:
Eduardo Valentin eduardo.valen...@nokia.com writes:
Hello Russell,
On Wed, Jan 05,
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 11:56:09AM +0200, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
It is in wakeup-enable gpio. But the driver removes the wakeup
flag from the gpio on its suspend function right after disabling the irq.
disable_irq(gpio_irq);
disable_irq_wake(gpio_irq);
In this case, the device uses gpio
Eduardo Valentin eduardo.valen...@nokia.com writes:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 03:22:51PM -0800, ext Kevin Hilman wrote:
Eduardo Valentin eduardo.valen...@nokia.com writes:
Hello Russell,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 06:19:18PM +, Russell King wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:58:03PM
Currently, if one calls disable_irq(gpio_irq), the irq
won't get disabled.
This is happening because the omap gpio code defines only
a .mask callback. And the default_disable function is just
a stub. The result is that, when someone calls disable_irq
for an irq in a gpio line, it will be kept
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:58:03PM +0200, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
Currently, if one calls disable_irq(gpio_irq), the irq
won't get disabled.
This is happening because the omap gpio code defines only
a .mask callback. And the default_disable function is just
a stub. The result is that, when
Hello Russell,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 06:19:18PM +, Russell King wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:58:03PM +0200, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
Currently, if one calls disable_irq(gpio_irq), the irq
won't get disabled.
This is happening because the omap gpio code defines only
a .mask
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:24:25PM +0200, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
The way this works is that although it isn't disabled at that point,
if it never triggers, then everything remains happy. However, if it
does trigger, the genirq code will then mask the interrupt and won't
call the handler.
Eduardo Valentin eduardo.valen...@nokia.com writes:
Hello Russell,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 06:19:18PM +, Russell King wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:58:03PM +0200, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
Currently, if one calls disable_irq(gpio_irq), the irq
won't get disabled.
This is
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 03:22:51PM -0800, ext Kevin Hilman wrote:
Eduardo Valentin eduardo.valen...@nokia.com writes:
Hello Russell,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 06:19:18PM +, Russell King wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:58:03PM +0200, Eduardo Valentin wrote:
Currently, if one calls
10 matches
Mail list logo
