From: ulf.samuelsson@atmel.com (Ulf Samuelsson)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: request_irq in I2C driver causes kernel to freeze during probe, but if done later - no problem!
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 01:22:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BAD4FDE.2010904@atmel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100326232421.GG29179@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Russell King - ARM Linux skrev:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 12:16:58AM +0100, Ulf Samuelsson wrote:
>> If the interrupt is executing, then we would see some I2C communication
>> as a result, but we do not see this, before the kernel freezes.
>>
>> The interrupt is (and should be) called on the falling edge of the
>> interrupt.
>>
>> I am currently scratching my head, and need help with ideas...
>
> Do you always return IRQ_HANDLED from this handler, or do you return
> IRQ_NONE if it does no work?
>
> If you always return IRQ_HANDLED even if no work was done, it could be
> that you're spinning on this interrupt, and because you're returning
> IRQ_HANDLED, the core interrupt handling code thinks progress is being
> made.
>
> If you return IRQ_NONE, then the "bad IRQ" detection code will kick in
> and disable the IRQ, which should result in some further progress.
>
Thanks for fast reply.
This is my interrupt routine, which always return IRQ_HANDLED.
sysfs shows that "mxt->invalid_irq_counter" is never incremented
even after I successfully enable the interrupt in sysfs.
mxt->dwork will always access the I2C bus but we dont see that.
static irqreturn_t mxt_irq_handler(int irq, void *_mxt)
{
struct mxt_data *mxt = _mxt;
unsigned long flags;
mxt->irq_counter++;
spin_lock_irqsave(&mxt->lock, flags);
if (mxt_valid_interrupt()) {
/* Macro, always returning 1 on these boards */
cancel_delayed_work(&mxt->dwork);
schedule_delayed_work(&mxt->dwork, 0);
mxt->valid_irq_counter++;
} else {
mxt->invalid_irq_counter++;
}
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mxt->lock, flags);
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
I do
INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&mxt->dwork, mxt_worker);
spin_lock_init(&mxt->lock);
before I request the irq
BR
Ulf Samuelsson.
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-27 0:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-26 23:16 request_irq in I2C driver causes kernel to freeze during probe, but if done later - no problem! Ulf Samuelsson
2010-03-26 23:24 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-27 0:22 ` Ulf Samuelsson [this message]
2010-03-27 0:41 ` Ulf Samuelsson
2010-03-27 1:12 ` Ben Dooks
2010-03-27 7:01 ` Ulf Samuelsson
2010-03-27 10:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-27 11:06 ` request_irq in I2C driver causes kernel to freeze duringprobe, " Ulf Samuelsson
2010-03-29 10:01 ` request_irq in I2C driver causes kernel to freeze during probe, " Mark Brown
2010-03-27 9:16 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-27 9:17 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4BAD4FDE.2010904@atmel.com \
--to=ulf.samuelsson@atmel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).