From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alban Bedel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: tca8418 - Add support for shared interrupt Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 17:34:30 +0100 Message-ID: <20121106173430.2d959c10@avionic-0020.adnet.avionic-design.de> References: <1352132052-19771-1-git-send-email-alban.bedel@avionic-design.de> <20121105185806.GA18149@core.coreip.homeip.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:63722 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751372Ab2KFQee (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2012 11:34:34 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20121105185806.GA18149@core.coreip.homeip.net> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 5 Nov 2012 10:58:06 -0800 Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > I do not think that using ONESHOT IRQ handlers in shared interrupt > configuration is a good idea as that interrupt will stay masked until > the keypad is done processing it, which may take some time. I don't really see what the problem is, shared ONESHOT handlers are supported by the IRQ framework. The IRQ line of this device is an open drain and so can be shared, and is shared on the hardware I'm using! I agree that the interrupt masking time might rise a little if many devices share the same line, but that's the normal drawback of shared interrupts. Alban