Re: [PATCH 18/21] iio: Replace IRQF_ONESHOT with IRQF_NO_THREAD

[Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>]

> > +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/adxl372.c  
> 
> > +		ret = devm_request_irq(dev, st->irq,
> > +				       iio_trigger_generic_data_rdy_poll,
> > +				       IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_NO_THREAD,
> > +				       indio_dev->name, st->dready_trig);
> >  		if (ret < 0)
> >  			return ret;  
> 
> Interestingly that this driver ignores the flags from firmware... Seems to me
> like a bug (not in your patch, obviously). Ditto for other drivers doing similar
> things.
> 

It's indeed a bug but one of those historic ones we can't fix without
high risk of regressions :(


> ...
> 
> > --- a/drivers/iio/pressure/dlhl60d.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/pressure/dlhl60d.c
> > @@ -306,9 +306,9 @@ static int dlh_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> >  	indio_dev->num_channels = ARRAY_SIZE(dlh_channels);
> >  
> >  	if (client->irq > 0) {
> > -		ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev, client->irq,
> > -			dlh_interrupt, NULL,
> > -			IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_ONESHOT,
> > +		ret = devm_request_irq(&client->dev, client->irq,
> > +				       dlh_interrupt,  
> 
> Joined to the previous line it gives exactly 80 characters, which is allowed.
> 
> > +				       IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_NO_THREAD,
> >  			st->info->name, indio_dev);  
> 
> Forgot to indent.
> 
> ...
> 
> > +		ret = devm_request_irq(&client->dev, client->irq,
> > +				       iio_trigger_generic_data_rdy_poll,
> > +				       IRQF_NO_THREAD, "tmp006_irq",
> > +				       data->drdy_trig);
> >  		if (ret < 0)
> >  			return ret;  
> 
> Jonathan et al., this seems to me like a duplication from one to another
> driver. Can't we do like a helper for it, so we don't change it each time
> the IRQ core or other things got changed?

I'm not sure what the helper would include that would shorten things much:
could hide two params, but need a longer name and that's going to be
hard to find.  So maybe...

J
>