Re: [PATCH 2/3] [OMAP:I2C]In case of a NACK|ARDY|AL return from the ISR

[Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>]

Sonasath, Moiz had written, on 07/15/2009 10:25 AM, the following:
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
>> index d280acf..05b5e4c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
>> @@ -685,8 +685,10 @@ omap_i2c_isr(int this_irq, void *dev_id)
>>  			err |= OMAP_I2C_STAT_AL;
>>  		}
>>  		if (stat & (OMAP_I2C_STAT_ARDY | OMAP_I2C_STAT_NACK |
>> -					OMAP_I2C_STAT_AL))
>> +					OMAP_I2C_STAT_AL)) {
>>  			omap_i2c_complete_cmd(dev, err);
>> +			return IRQ_HANDLED;
>> +		}
> What is the status of IRQ_STAT register? Who will clear that if we return immediately from ISR? Isr will be reinvoked and we'd handle the same anyways..
> 
> [Moiz]
> Correct me if I am wrong, but you are referring to the OMAP_I2C_STAT_REG (which has the interrupt status information). 
 >This is actually ACKED just before going into the NACK|AL|ARDY error 
cases. I suppose a few days back you also sent out a
 >atch to change this to ACK all interrupts other than RRDY/RDR and 
XRDY/XDR as we have to ACK these only after we service them.
>
> I think this conflicts with [1]
> [Moiz]
> Actually, it does not conflict with [1], as [1] changes the later part of the code allowing this patch to be applied cleanly.

Got it. Thanks for clarifying. my bad.
Acked-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon