From: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: TWL4030 IRQ
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:30:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090804133041.GC8601@sortiz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090804105100.GK24334@atomide.com>
Hi Tony,
On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:51:00PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> [090803 20:26]:
> > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 06:36:12PM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> > > Hi Santosh,
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:30:48AM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > > > From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
> > > >
> > > > (Rebased on 2.6.31-rc4)
> > > >
> > > > The TWL4030 IRQ handler has a bug which leads to spinlock lock-up. It is
> > > > calling the 'unmask' function in a process context. :The mask/unmask/ack
> > > > functions are only designed to be called from the IRQ handler code,
> > > > or the proper API interfaces found in linux/interrupt.h.
> > > >
> > > > Also there is no need to have IRQ chaining mechanism. The right way to
> > > > handle this is to claim the parent interrupt as a standard interrupt
> > > > and arrange for handle_twl4030_pih to take care of the rest of the devices.
> > > I'd like this one to be split in 2 different patches as you're addressing 2
> > > different issues here.
> >
> > You'd like me to remove the IRQ handling entirely from this code as one
> > patch, thereby breaking it, and then add the new IRQ handling as a
> > separate patch?
> >
> > Are you sure?
> >
> > I really don't think so, and I suspect you haven't even read the patch.
> >
> > It's all _one_ issue, with two explainations of why the current code is
> > wrong.
> >
> > So my reply is: unable to split patch.
>
> Yeah I guess the description "Also there is no need.." above could be
> just "This is fixed by not using IRQ chaining mechanism" if anything.
Yep, I was mislead by the description, but I also didnt look at the patch
carefully enough.
> Anyways would be nice to get this in as a fix.
I applied it to my for-next branch for now, and I'll also try to have Linus
pulling it.
Cheers,
Samuel.
> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
--
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-04 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-27 6:00 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: TWL4030 IRQ Santosh Shilimkar
2009-08-01 12:50 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2009-08-03 16:36 ` Samuel Ortiz
2009-08-03 17:23 ` Russell King
2009-08-04 10:51 ` Tony Lindgren
2009-08-04 13:30 ` Samuel Ortiz [this message]
2009-08-04 13:59 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090804133041.GC8601@sortiz.org \
--to=sameo@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.