From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: Request threaded-only IRQs with IRQF_ONESHOT
Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 12:04:02 -0700
Message-ID: <20120702190402.GA16271@core.coreip.homeip.net>
References: <1341229460-23732-1-git-send-email-lars@metafoo.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-gh0-f174.google.com ([209.85.160.174]:36486 "EHLO
	mail-gh0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751047Ab2GBTEN (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-input@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 2 Jul 2012 15:04:13 -0400
Received: by ghrr11 with SMTP id r11so4454224ghr.19
        for <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 02 Jul 2012 12:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1341229460-23732-1-git-send-email-lars@metafoo.de>
Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org
To: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Fabien Marteau <fabien.marteau@armadeus.com>, HeungJun Kim <riverful.kim@samsung.com>, Zhang Jiejing <jiejing.zhang@freescale.com>, Bo Shen <voice.shen@atmel.com>, Sriramakrishnan <srk@ti.com>, Kyle Manna <kyle.manna@fuel7.com>, Cyril Chemparathy <cyril@ti.com>, Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@samsung.com>, Naveen Kumar Gaddipati <naveen.gaddipati@stericsson.com>, Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>, Jianchun Bian <jcbian@pixcir.com.cn>, Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@nokia.com>, Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@analog.com>, linux-input@vger.kernel.org

H Lars, Thomas,

On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 01:44:20PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> Since commit 1c6c69525b ("genirq: Reject bogus threaded irq requests") threaded
> IRQs without a primary handler need to be requested with IRQF_ONESHOT, otherwise
> the request will fail. This patch adds the IRQF_ONESHOT to IIO drivers where it
> is missing. Not modified by this patch are those drivers where the requested IRQ
> will always be a nested IRQ (e.g. because it's part of an MFD), since for this
> special case IRQF_ONESHOT is not required to be specified when requesting the
> IRQ.

This is not very helpful. Why, instead of bailing out, genirq case does
not add IRQF_ONESHOT itself to the flags? Then we would not need to
alter zillions of drivers.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry