Hi,

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 02:30:27PM +0200, ext hvaibhav@ti.com wrote:
quoted text
>+static irqreturn_t s35390a_irq_thread(int irq, void *handle)
>+{
>+	char buf[1];
>+	struct s35390a *s35390a = handle;
>+	struct i2c_client *client = s35390a->client[0];

don't you need some locking on the irq handler ? a mutex maybe ? Just 
wondering...

quoted text
>@@ -261,15 +424,30 @@ static int s35390a_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> 	if (s35390a_get_datetime(client, &tm) < 0)
> 		dev_warn(&client->dev, "clock needs to be set\n");
>
>+	if (client->irq >= 0) {
>+		err = request_threaded_irq(client->irq, NULL,
>+				s35390a_irq_thread,
>+				IRQF_TRIGGER_LOW | IRQF_ONESHOT,
>+				client->name, s35390a);
>+		if (err) {
>+			dev_err(&client->dev, "unable to request IRQ\n");
>+			goto exit_dummy;
>+		}
>+	}
>+
> 	s35390a->rtc = rtc_device_register(s35390a_driver.driver.name,
> 				&client->dev, &s35390a_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE);
>
> 	if (IS_ERR(s35390a->rtc)) {
> 		err = PTR_ERR(s35390a->rtc);
>-		goto exit_dummy;
>+		goto exit_intr;
> 	}
>+
> 	return 0;
>
>+exit_intr:
>+	free_irq(client->irq, client);

free_irq() won't behave correctly, I believe since you're passing 
different dev_id parameters. If you look at the implementation of 
free_irq() you'll see it uses dev_id to find the correct struct 
irqaction pointer.

-- 
balbi

DefectiveByDesign.org
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/