diff mbox

[9/10] omap mailbox: OMAP4 Mailbox Patch to change the IRQ flag from IRQF_DISABLED to IRQF_SHARED

Message ID B85A65D85D7EB246BE421B3FB0FBB59301DD9921E7@dbde02.ent.ti.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted, archived
Delegated to: Tony Lindgren
Headers show

Commit Message

C.A, Subramaniam Sept. 22, 2009, 2:35 p.m. UTC 
From 96827a1faf75893646b459bd3c0b7e9453376bb2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: C A Subramaniam <subramaniam.ca@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 22:40:16 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 9/10] omap mailbox: OMAP4 Mailbox Patch to change the IRQ flag from IRQF_DISABLED to IRQF_SHARED

Currently, this facilitates both the tesla and ducati
sides to request for the same irq through an
omap_mbox_get() call.

Signed-off-by: C A Subramaniam <subramaniam.ca@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Ramesh Gupta G <grgupta@ti.com>
---
 arch/arm/plat-omap/mailbox.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

Comments

Russell King Sept. 23, 2009, 9:58 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 08:05:09PM +0530, C.A, Subramaniam wrote:
> Currently, this facilitates both the tesla and ducati
> sides to request for the same irq through an
> omap_mbox_get() call.

You're dropping IRQF_DISABLED - is this safe?  Why was the original code
using it?  Do you need IRQF_DISABLED|IRQF_SHARED ?
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/mailbox.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/mailbox.c
index 72ea119..3ab3f0d 100644
--- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/mailbox.c
+++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/mailbox.c
@@ -284,7 +284,7 @@  static int omap_mbox_startup(struct omap_mbox *mbox)
 		write_unlock(&mboxes_lock);
 	}
 
-	ret = request_irq(mbox->irq, mbox_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
+	ret = request_irq(mbox->irq, mbox_interrupt, IRQF_SHARED,
 				mbox->name, mbox);
 	if (unlikely(ret)) {
 		printk(KERN_ERR