lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Question] Should we make the primary interrupt handler configurable for regmap_add_irq_chip()?
On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 12:15:21PM +0800, Yi Zhang wrote:

> I met a scenario:
> As soon as the interrupt is triggered, a wakelock is needed to be held
> until the threaded handler finishes,
> I think we may hold it in the primary interrupt handler, but now it's
> NULL by default;

This sounds like something we should just support in the core, though to
be honest I'd expect the interrupt core to hold a wakelock itself during
interrupt processing. If we're doing it in regmap then allowing the
caller to set a wakelock to hold seems better than making them all write
the code to take and release it.
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-14 22:41    [W:0.040 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site