From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: add support for PowerOn(PonKey) button on the AB8500 MFD Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 13:24:31 -0700 Message-ID: <20100902202431.GA22482@core.coreip.homeip.net> References: <1283326551-13751-1-git-send-email-sundar.iyer@stericsson.com> <20100901165142.GB6908@core.coreip.homeip.net> <20100902065537.GA26429@bnru01.bnr.st.com> <20100902172222.GA17386@core.coreip.homeip.net> <4C8000D3.3060903@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:48021 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756945Ab0IBUYh (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 16:24:37 -0400 Received: by iwn5 with SMTP id 5so803610iwn.19 for ; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 13:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C8000D3.3060903@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Trilok Soni Cc: Rabin Vincent , Sundar R IYER , "sameo@linux.intel.com" , "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" , STEricsson_nomadik_linux Hi Trilok, On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 01:23:55AM +0530, Trilok Soni wrote: > Hi Dmitry, > > On 9/2/2010 10:52 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > > >>> > >>> I'll change it to use normal interrupts locally, no need to resubmit. > >> > >> Changing it to request_irq() will cause it to fail, because __setup_irq > >> will error out if this is a nested thread interrupt and no interrupt > >> thread is specified. request_any_context_irq() should work, if you > >> would like to get rid of explicitly asking for a threaded irq. > >> > > > > OK, request_any_context_irq() it is then. > > Though request_any_context_irq() would work here, but I would still > prefer to use the request_threaded_irq(..) because power-on key functionality > is in-built to this PMIC chip and it will always be threaded it seems. No new > thread will be created because they did the right thing in their PMIC core > irq code it seems. > > We could prefer the request_any_context_irq(...) when we are using the line > (say gpio) coming out of this PMIC and used by generic device driver where > the another h/w design could have memory mapped gpio for the same device driver. > > Better to keep this driver with request_threaded_irq(..) only. > I disagree. I believe that drivers should use request_threaded_irq() only if they _themselves_ require handling interrupts in process context. The fact that someone up the stack set up threaded IRQ and not hard IRQ should not matter. Ideally I'd love request_irq() to be what request_any_context_irq() currently is and then we'd have request_hard_irq() for driver that absolutely need hard IRQ context. Thanks. -- Dmitry