| Message ID | 1508432760-17847-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 07:05:43PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > The interrupt for the temperature threshold is not enabled at the end of the > probe function, enable it after the setup is complete. > > On the other side, the irq_enabled is not correctly set as we are checking if > the interrupt is masked where 'yes' means irq_enabled=false. > > irq_get_irqchip_state(data->irq, IRQCHIP_STATE_MASKED, > &data->irq_enabled); > > As we are always enabling the interrupt, it is pointless to check if > the interrupt is masked or not, just set irq_enabled to 'true'. Why only 18 patches this time? Can you please add a cover letter (0/X) next time? What happened to the other 7 patches? > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> > Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org> > Tested-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org> > --- > drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c | 5 +++-- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c > index 9c3ce34..f3b50b0 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c > @@ -345,8 +345,7 @@ static int hisi_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > } > > hisi_thermal_enable_bind_irq_sensor(data); > - irq_get_irqchip_state(data->irq, IRQCHIP_STATE_MASKED, > - &data->irq_enabled); > + data->irq_enabled = true; > > for (i = 0; i < HISI_MAX_SENSORS; ++i) { > ret = hisi_thermal_register_sensor(pdev, data, > @@ -358,6 +357,8 @@ static int hisi_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > hisi_thermal_toggle_sensor(&data->sensors[i], true); > } > > + enable_irq(data->irq); > + > return 0; > } > > -- > 2.7.4 >
On 20/10/2017 03:52, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 07:05:43PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> The interrupt for the temperature threshold is not enabled at the end of the >> probe function, enable it after the setup is complete. >> >> On the other side, the irq_enabled is not correctly set as we are checking if >> the interrupt is masked where 'yes' means irq_enabled=false. >> >> irq_get_irqchip_state(data->irq, IRQCHIP_STATE_MASKED, >> &data->irq_enabled); >> >> As we are always enabling the interrupt, it is pointless to check if >> the interrupt is masked or not, just set irq_enabled to 'true'. > > > Why only 18 patches this time? Can you please add a cover letter (0/X) > next time? Yes sure. Actually, I grouped the different series (acked and reviewed) into a git pull request instead of having them around. I thought that could help you. I sent a pull request with all these patches under this pull request along with a description. Did you receive it? Note without the threaded email view, it is easy to miss it. > What happened to the other 7 patches? As stated in the PR, I put them apart to solve the multi threshold issue before resubmitting, probably by folding Kevin's latest change. I will resend them very shortly. -- Daniel
diff --git a/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c index 9c3ce34..f3b50b0 100644 --- a/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c +++ b/drivers/thermal/hisi_thermal.c @@ -345,8 +345,7 @@ static int hisi_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) } hisi_thermal_enable_bind_irq_sensor(data); - irq_get_irqchip_state(data->irq, IRQCHIP_STATE_MASKED, - &data->irq_enabled); + data->irq_enabled = true; for (i = 0; i < HISI_MAX_SENSORS; ++i) { ret = hisi_thermal_register_sensor(pdev, data, @@ -358,6 +357,8 @@ static int hisi_thermal_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) hisi_thermal_toggle_sensor(&data->sensors[i], true); } + enable_irq(data->irq); + return 0; }