All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, marcan@marcan.st,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com,
	tglx@linutronix.de, will@kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] arm64: irq: add a default handle_irq panic function
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:23:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ft1o1ec7.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210222120614.GC70951@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>

On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:06:14 +0000,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:43:13AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:

[...]

> > As I said, it's not a big deal. I doubt that we'll see default_handle_irq()
> > exploding in practice. But the real nit here is the difference of treatment
> > between IRQ and FIQ. *IF* we ever get a system that only signals its
> > interrupt as FIQ (and I don't see why we'd forbid that), then we would
> 
> That's a fair point.
> 
> For consistency, we could remove the init_IRQ() panic() and instead log
> the registered handlers, e.g.
> 
> | pr_info("Root IRQ handler is %ps\n", handle_arch_irq);
> | pr_info("Root FIQ handler is %ps\n", handle_arch_fiq);
> 
> ... or do that inside the set_handle_{irq,fiq}() functions. That way the
> messages (or absence thereof) would be sufficient to diagnose the lack
> of a root IRQ/FIQ handler when IRQ/FIQ happens to be quiescent.
> 
> Does that sound any better?

Yup, I quite like the second variant (using set_handle_{irq,fiq}()).

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	james.morse@arm.com, marcan@marcan.st, tglx@linutronix.de,
	will@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] arm64: irq: add a default handle_irq panic function
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:23:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ft1o1ec7.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210222120614.GC70951@C02TD0UTHF1T.local>

On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 12:06:14 +0000,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:43:13AM +0000, Marc Zyngier wrote:

[...]

> > As I said, it's not a big deal. I doubt that we'll see default_handle_irq()
> > exploding in practice. But the real nit here is the difference of treatment
> > between IRQ and FIQ. *IF* we ever get a system that only signals its
> > interrupt as FIQ (and I don't see why we'd forbid that), then we would
> 
> That's a fair point.
> 
> For consistency, we could remove the init_IRQ() panic() and instead log
> the registered handlers, e.g.
> 
> | pr_info("Root IRQ handler is %ps\n", handle_arch_irq);
> | pr_info("Root FIQ handler is %ps\n", handle_arch_fiq);
> 
> ... or do that inside the set_handle_{irq,fiq}() functions. That way the
> messages (or absence thereof) would be sufficient to diagnose the lack
> of a root IRQ/FIQ handler when IRQ/FIQ happens to be quiescent.
> 
> Does that sound any better?

Yup, I quite like the second variant (using set_handle_{irq,fiq}()).

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-22 12:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-02-19 11:38 [PATCH 0/8] arm64: Support FIQ controller registration Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:38 ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 1/8] ARM: ep93xx: Select GENERIC_IRQ_MULTI_HANDLER directly Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:38   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 2/8] irqchip: Do not blindly select CONFIG_GENERIC_IRQ_MULTI_HANDLER Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:38   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:38 ` [PATCH 3/8] genirq: Allow architectures to override set_handle_irq() fallback Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:38   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39 ` [PATCH 4/8] arm64: don't use GENERIC_IRQ_MULTI_HANDLER Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39 ` [PATCH 5/8] arm64: irq: add a default handle_irq panic function Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22  9:59   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22  9:59     ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22 10:48     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-22 10:48       ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-22 11:25       ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22 11:25         ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22 11:43         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-22 11:43           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-22 12:06           ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22 12:06             ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22 12:23             ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2021-02-22 12:23               ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-19 11:39 ` [PATCH 6/8] arm64: entry: factor irq triage logic into macros Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39 ` [PATCH 7/8] arm64: Always keep DAIF.[IF] in sync Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 17:25   ` [PATCH 7/8 v1.5] " Hector Martin
2021-02-19 17:25     ` Hector Martin
2021-02-19 18:26     ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 18:26       ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22 17:39       ` Hector Martin
2021-02-22 17:39         ` Hector Martin
2021-02-22 18:43         ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-22 18:43           ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39 ` [PATCH 8/8] arm64: irq: allow FIQs to be handled Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 11:39   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 15:37   ` Joey Gouly
2021-02-19 15:37     ` Joey Gouly
2021-02-19 18:18     ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 18:18       ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 15:41 ` [PATCH 0/8] arm64: Support FIQ controller registration Hector Martin
2021-02-19 15:41   ` Hector Martin
2021-02-19 16:13   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 16:13     ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-19 18:10 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-19 18:10   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-24 14:06   ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-24 14:06     ` Mark Rutland
2021-02-24 14:32     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-02-24 14:32       ` Marc Zyngier

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=87ft1o1ec7.wl-maz@kernel.org \
    --to=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcan@marcan.st \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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.