Re: [PATCH] serial: omap: Fix IRQ handling return value

2013-08-27 Thread Kevin Hilman
Greg,


On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Kevin Hilman  wrote:
> +Felipe
>
> On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Alexander Savchenko
>  wrote:
>> From: Ruchika Kharwar 
>>
>> Ensure the Interrupt handling routine return IRQ_HANDLED vs
>> IRQ_NONE.
>
> Why?
>
> By unconditionally returning IRQ_HANDLED, this patch will surely break
> systems where the UART IRQ is shared with other platforms.
>
> I just noticed this patch when bisecting a related problem.  Why
> wasn't this Cc'd to linux-omap where OMAP users might have been more
> likely to see it?
>
> Greg, without a better justification in the changelog, I think this
> patch should be dropped from tty-next.

Can you drop this from tty-next please?

The authors aren't responding (one of the ti.com addresses bounced)
and this "fix" is most is not correct.

Kevin

> Kevin
>
>> Signed-off-by: Ruchika Kharwar 
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Savchenko 
>> ---
>>  drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c |4 +---
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c 
>> b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c
>> index b6d1728..70feeb3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/omap-serial.c
>> @@ -479,7 +479,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> struct uart_omap_port *up = dev_id;
>> unsigned int iir, lsr;
>> unsigned int type;
>> -   irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE;
>> int max_count = 256;
>>
>> spin_lock(&up->port.lock);
>> @@ -490,7 +489,6 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> if (iir & UART_IIR_NO_INT)
>> break;
>>
>> -   ret = IRQ_HANDLED;
>> lsr = serial_in(up, UART_LSR);
>>
>> /* extract IRQ type from IIR register */
>> @@ -529,7 +527,7 @@ static irqreturn_t serial_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(up->dev);
>> up->port_activity = jiffies;
>>
>> -   return ret;
>> +   return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>  }
>>
>>  static unsigned int serial_omap_tx_empty(struct uart_port *port)
>> --
>> 1.7.9.5
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>> the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


Re: [PATCH] serial: omap: Fix IRQ handling return value

2013-08-27 Thread Greg KH
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 07:30:19AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Greg,
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Kevin Hilman  wrote:
> > +Felipe
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 6:29 AM, Alexander Savchenko
> >  wrote:
> >> From: Ruchika Kharwar 
> >>
> >> Ensure the Interrupt handling routine return IRQ_HANDLED vs
> >> IRQ_NONE.
> >
> > Why?
> >
> > By unconditionally returning IRQ_HANDLED, this patch will surely break
> > systems where the UART IRQ is shared with other platforms.
> >
> > I just noticed this patch when bisecting a related problem.  Why
> > wasn't this Cc'd to linux-omap where OMAP users might have been more
> > likely to see it?
> >
> > Greg, without a better justification in the changelog, I think this
> > patch should be dropped from tty-next.
> 
> Can you drop this from tty-next please?
> 
> The authors aren't responding (one of the ti.com addresses bounced)
> and this "fix" is most is not correct.

Yes, sorry, behind on my pending tty patch queue.  I'll try to get to it
this week.

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html