From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753668AbZGNIVl (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:21:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753280AbZGNIVk (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:21:40 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com ([209.85.198.224]:46376 "EHLO rv-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752330AbZGNIVj (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:21:39 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; b=UMawxKWa1KVBzSTVmRiyfTgcc8lvBoV4Ff2wHzzfZUxSbeH1pKzpUHX7pypo/rAk7M tDghpOqRYM6hRnAqhU6Ti0Jo3RV7GP2ALwzWlls9Uk6ZJrKDRtepeekgDc6dMDIngzhG wJmUiXRLDvOA8SDrmFq2VmX+EB8+vL40ZBq6k= Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:21:28 -0700 From: Dmitry Torokhov To: Richard =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=F6jfors?= Cc: Thierry Reding , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , kwangwoo.lee@gmail.com, Trilok Soni , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tsc2007: remove HR timer Message-ID: <20090714082128.GF2822@dtor-d630.eng.vmware.com> References: <4A40C288.2060702@mocean-labs.com> <20090714044957.GD2822@dtor-d630.eng.vmware.com> <20090714070806.GA1619@avionic-design.de> <4A5C3B06.7020207@mocean-labs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <4A5C3B06.7020207@mocean-labs.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 10:00:06AM +0200, Richard Röjfors wrote: > On 7/14/09 9:08 AM, Thierry Reding wrote: >> * Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>> Hi Richard, >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 01:54:48PM +0200, Richard Röjfors wrote: >> [...] >>> +static void tsc2007_free_irq(struct tsc2007 *ts) >>> +{ >>> + free_irq(ts->irq, ts); >>> + if (cancel_delayed_work_sync(&ts->work)) { >>> + /* >>> + * Work was pending, therefore we need to enable >>> + * IRQ here to balance the disable_irq() done in the >>> + * interrupt handler. >>> + */ >>> + enable_irq(ts->irq); >>> + } >>> +} >> [...] >>> -static int tsc2007_remove(struct i2c_client *client) >>> +static int __devexit tsc2007_remove(struct i2c_client *client) >>> { >>> struct tsc2007 *ts = i2c_get_clientdata(client); >>> - struct tsc2007_platform_data *pdata; >>> + struct tsc2007_platform_data *pdata = client->dev.platform_data; >>> >>> - cancel_delayed_work_sync(&ts->work); >>> + free_irq(ts->irq, ts); >>> + if (cancel_delayed_work_sync(&ts->work)) { >>> + /* >>> + * Work was pending, therefore we need to enable >>> + * IRQ here to balance the disabel done in the >>> + * interrupt handler. >>> + */ >>> + enable_irq(ts->irq); >>> + } >> >> Shouldn't this be tsc2007_free_irq(ts) as well? > > Is this really good enough? The work function might re-enable the IRQ. I am pretty sure it is. cancel_delayed_work_sync() will terurn true if there was work scheduled but not yet executed. In this case we know that IRQ was disabled by interrupt handler and will re-enable it. -- Dmitry