From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754436AbbGXGt7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:49:59 -0400
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.104]:2464 "EHLO
	mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754367AbbGXGtn (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 24 Jul 2015 02:49:43 -0400
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,536,1432591200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="141050586"
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:49:40 +0200 (CEST)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
X-X-Sender: jll@localhost6.localdomain6
To: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>, Alex Smith <alex.smith@imgtec.com>,
        Zubair.Kakakhel@imgtec.com, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
        Vaishali Thakkar <vthakkar1994@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: question about drivers/dma/dma-jz4780.c
In-Reply-To: <20150724063019.GP29916@localhost>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1507240849270.2225@localhost6.localdomain6>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1507191104040.2002@localhost6.localdomain6> <55ACAEC5.7090000@imgtec.com> <alpine.DEB.2.10.1507201027560.2408@hadrien> <20150721041558.GE23525@localhost> <55AFA7F9.20600@imgtec.com> <20150723172110.GB29916@localhost>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1507231920360.2450@hadrien> <20150724054226.GO29916@localhost> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1507240749290.2225@localhost6.localdomain6> <20150724063019.GP29916@localhost>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 24 Jul 2015, Vinod Koul wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 07:51:28AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > Yes for dmaengine drivers I do ask this question which typically ends up in
> > > driver invoking devm_irq_free() in driver's remove callback
> > > 
> > > IMHO don't think devm irq calls are very useful, they do make stuff
> > > complicate
> > 
> > Would it be better then to just go back to request_irq (or whatever is
> > appropriate in this case).  It would seem that the devm property can never
> > be relied on, so there is no point to use it.
> 
> Yes I do think that is right way in this case

Thanks for your help.

julia