Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Jan 2014 21:06:18 +0000 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: [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] | |