All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Eliav Farber <farbere@amazon.com>,
	linux@armlinux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
	christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, naveen@kernel.org,
	maddy@linux.ibm.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
	palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, bhe@redhat.com, farbere@amazon.com,
	hbathini@linux.ibm.com, adityag@linux.ibm.com,
	songshuaishuai@tinylab.org, takakura@valinux.co.jp,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Cc: jonnyc@amazon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: kexec: Check if IRQ is already masked before masking
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:43:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ldx3y6yf.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241127152236.26122-1-farbere@amazon.com>

On Wed, Nov 27 2024 at 15:22, Eliav Farber wrote:

As a related note. The subject line is not really matching what the
patch does. It want's to be split into a core change and one patch per
architecture.

> This patch replaces the direct invocation of the irq_mask() and

git grep 'This patch' Documentation/process/

> irq_disable() hooks with simplified code that leverages the
> irq_disable() kernel infrastructure. This higher-level function checks
> the interrupt's state to prevent redundant operations. Additionally, the
> IRQ_DISABLE_UNLAZY status flag is set to ensure that, for interrupt
> chips lacking an irq_disable callback, the disable operation is handled
> using the lazy approach.

Not that it matters much anymore, but the last sentence does not make
sense:

  Set the UNLAZY flag so disable is handled using the LAZY approach ...

Thanks,

        tglx


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Eliav Farber <farbere@amazon.com>,
	linux@armlinux.org.uk, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com,
	christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, naveen@kernel.org,
	maddy@linux.ibm.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
	palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, bhe@redhat.com, farbere@amazon.com,
	hbathini@linux.ibm.com, adityag@linux.ibm.com,
	songshuaishuai@tinylab.org, takakura@valinux.co.jp,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Cc: jonnyc@amazon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: kexec: Check if IRQ is already masked before masking
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:43:20 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ldx3y6yf.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241127152236.26122-1-farbere@amazon.com>

On Wed, Nov 27 2024 at 15:22, Eliav Farber wrote:

As a related note. The subject line is not really matching what the
patch does. It want's to be split into a core change and one patch per
architecture.

> This patch replaces the direct invocation of the irq_mask() and

git grep 'This patch' Documentation/process/

> irq_disable() hooks with simplified code that leverages the
> irq_disable() kernel infrastructure. This higher-level function checks
> the interrupt's state to prevent redundant operations. Additionally, the
> IRQ_DISABLE_UNLAZY status flag is set to ensure that, for interrupt
> chips lacking an irq_disable callback, the disable operation is handled
> using the lazy approach.

Not that it matters much anymore, but the last sentence does not make
sense:

  Set the UNLAZY flag so disable is handled using the LAZY approach ...

Thanks,

        tglx

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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-11-28 10:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-11-27 15:22 [PATCH v2] arm64: kexec: Check if IRQ is already masked before masking Eliav Farber
2024-11-27 15:22 ` Eliav Farber
2024-11-28 10:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-11-28 10:39   ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-11-28 10:43 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2024-11-28 10:43   ` Thomas Gleixner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-11-28 20:07 Farber, Eliav
2024-11-28 20:07 ` Farber, Eliav

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=87ldx3y6yf.ffs@tglx \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=adityag@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
    --cc=bhe@redhat.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
    --cc=farbere@amazon.com \
    --cc=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jonnyc@amazon.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=naveen@kernel.org \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
    --cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
    --cc=songshuaishuai@tinylab.org \
    --cc=takakura@valinux.co.jp \
    --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.