[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] [PATCH 02/62] mpu401:snd_mpu401_uart_new(): split semantic of irq_flags
Yong Zhang wrote:
> Now snd_mpu401_uart_new() parameter 'irq_flags' take two role
> in it: one is the condition to request_irq and the other is
> the real irq_flags which will be transfered to request_irq().
> So add another parameter 'want_irq' to take the role of the
> first one, this will make it easy to remove IRQF_DISABLED.

Please note that the irq number is also intended to pass this

> * @irq: the irq number, -1 if no interrupt for mpu
> ...
> - if (irq >= 0 && irq_flags) {
> if (request_irq(irq, snd_mpu401_uart_interrupt, irq_flags,

Of course, most of snd_mpu401_uart_new()'s users get this wrong and use
0 instead of -1, relying on the irq_flags parameter only. But if these
are fixed to use irq == -1, we get the same effect without having to
introduce another parameter.


 \ /
  Last update: 2011-09-08 12:55    [W:0.169 / U:1.356 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site