From: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@codeaurora.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC IRQ] genirq: fix handle_nested_irq for lazy disable
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:22:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CC9B167.8010401@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1010270909590.3100@localhost6.localdomain6>
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> index baa5c4a..35ccc41 100644
>> --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> @@ -419,6 +419,7 @@ void handle_nested_irq(unsigned int irq)
>> {
>> struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
>> struct irqaction *action;
>> + int mask_this_irq = 0;
>> irqreturn_t action_ret;
>>
>> might_sleep();
>> @@ -428,8 +429,10 @@ void handle_nested_irq(unsigned int irq)
>> kstat_incr_irqs_this_cpu(irq, desc);
>>
>> action = desc->action;
>> - if (unlikely(!action || (desc->status & IRQ_DISABLED)))
>> + if (unlikely(!action || (desc->status & IRQ_DISABLED))) {
>> + mask_this_irq = 1;
>> goto out_unlock;
>> + }
>>
>> desc->status |= IRQ_INPROGRESS;
>> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&desc->lock);e
>> @@ -443,6 +446,11 @@ void handle_nested_irq(unsigned int irq)
>>
>> out_unlock:
>> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&desc->lock);
>> + if (unlikely(mask_this_irq)) {
>> + chip_bus_lock(irq, desc);
>> + desc->chip->mask(irq);
>
> That does not work with current mainline due to the irq_chip changes,
> can you please respin against linus latest?
Sure will address this in the next patch.
>
> Also there is no requirement for irq_chip instances to implement the
> mask function, so this might crash the kernel for innocent users of
> that infrastructure. mask_irq() is your friend.
Thanks, this one too.
>
> Aside of that this wont work for edge triggered interrupts, as you'd
> loose the edge, so this needs more thought and a thorough look at the
> users of handle_nested_irq().
I didn't understand this though. This patch will mask the interrupt in
the controller even if it were edge. My interrupt controller latches
edges and wants a mask (or an ack) to be executed to deactivate the line
summary line. Do you mean that I should mark the interrupt IRQ_PENDING
if it were an edge before masking it? If not, can you please explain.
Thanks,
Abhijeet
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-28 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-27 1:50 [RFC IRQ] genirq: fix handle_nested_irq for lazy disable adharmap
2010-10-27 8:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-10-28 17:22 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar [this message]
2010-10-28 18:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-10-29 0:04 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
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=4CC9B167.8010401@codeaurora.org \
--to=adharmap@codeaurora.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.