Re: mfd regmap irq to handle some cases

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 04:28:29AM +0000, Ashish Jangam wrote:

> > > There will processing of false events which is undesirable.

> > But what actually happens?  RTC interrupts aren't going to be high
> > volume, if we get the odd spurious interrupt and handle it gracefully
> > I'm not sure we really care.

> spurious interrupt we get on clearing event and event can be from any
> mfd children. But since now, deferring event clear is not the approach
> we can ignore about the spurious interrupt.
> Now looking at the old issue of determining the RTC type (periodic or tick)
> on event clearing this info (RTC type) gets lost for the register since in regmap_irq
> we first clear and then process the event.

That we can handle easily enough by adding a flag to the interrupt
definition deferring the acknowledgement.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/