Re: ANN: apple motion sensor reverse engineered
- To: Johannes Berg <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Cc: debian-powerpc list <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: ANN: apple motion sensor reverse engineered
- From: Stelian Pop <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 13:14:22 +0200
- Message-id: <email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <1125485887.8363.12.camel@localhost>
- References: <1124450471.24118.12.camel@localhost> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <1125442868.8363.0.camel@localhost> <email@example.com> <1125482773.8363.10.camel@localhost> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <1125485887.8363.12.camel@localhost>
Le mercredi 31 août 2005 à 12:58 +0200, Johannes Berg a écrit :
> On Wed, 2005-08-31 at 12:11 +0200, Stelian Pop wrote:
> > I have the feeling that something is not entirely correct in the code
> > who activate/deactivate the interrupts, but I can't see what.
> I haven't been able to reproduce it yet, is there anything you want me
> to do if it should happen again?
Edit the code and print the value of ams.irq1 and ams.irq2 just before
the request_irq() calls.
The ams device seems to always use 57 and 58 (and your trace confirmes
those were the fired irq), but maybe we misinterpret somehow the OF
information and we register the handlers on some other random irq.
Stelian Pop <email@example.com>