Re: [PATCH 1/2] Serial: Define IRQ flags for 8250 driver

[Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@nokia.com>]

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 03:46:37AM +0200, ext Menon, Nishanth wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-omap-
> > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Pandita, Vikram
> > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 7:50 PM
> > To: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: Pandita, Vikram
> > Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Serial: Define IRQ flags for 8250 driver
> > 
> > 
> > +	/* Get IRQ Trigger Flag */
> > +	if (up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_TRIG_RISING)
> > +		irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING;
> > +	else if (up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_TRIG_FALLING)
> > +		irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING;
> > +	else if (up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_TRIG_HIGH)
> > +		irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH;
> > +	else if (up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_TRIG_LOW)
> > +		irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW;
> > +
> Blame it on my dislike for nested if elseif, but...
> irq_flags |= 
> 	(up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_TRIG_RISING)? IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING :
> 	(up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_TRIG_FALLING)? IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING :
> 	(up->port.flags & IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH)? IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH :
> 	(up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_TRIG_LOW)? IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW : 0;
> 
> Makes sense?

switch (up->port.flags & UPF_IRQ_FLAGS_MASK) {
case UPF_IRQ_TRIG_RISING:
	irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING;
	break;
case UPF_IRQ_TRIG_FALLING:
	irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING;
	break;
case UPF_IRQ_TRIG_HIGH:
	irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH;
	break;
case UPF_IRQ_TRIG_LOW:
	irq_flags |= IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW;
	break;
default:
	printk(KERN_ERR "Unsupported flag\n");
	return -EINVAL;
}

???

-- 
balbi