<snip> >> > static irqreturn_t i2c_imx_isr(int irq, void *dev_id) @@ -583,6 >> > +582,9 @@ static irqreturn_t i2c_imx_isr(int irq, void *dev_id) >> > struct imx_i2c_struct *i2c_imx = dev_id; >> > unsigned int temp; >> > >> > + if (pm_runtime_suspended(i2c_imx->adapter.dev.parent)) >> > + return IRQ_NONE; >> > + >> >> Didn't quite get this one. > > Yes, there don't need to add pm_runtime_suspended() check in isr handler. But > in some worse worse case, like system is very > busy and irq is blocked by others
you mean other irqs? > that irq response coming is very late while i2c clock is gated off, the check > can avoid system hang. > > So I think it can be reasonable. How do you think ? > > Regards, > Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
