* [patch 6/8] arm: ns9xxx: Remove private irq flow handler
[not found] <20110202212258.546660886@linutronix.de>
@ 2011-02-02 21:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-02-03 7:56 ` Uwe Kleine-König
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2011-02-02 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: arm-ns9xxx-remove-private-irq-handler.patch
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20110202/5c858b71/attachment.ksh>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* [patch 6/8] arm: ns9xxx: Remove private irq flow handler
2011-02-02 21:41 ` [patch 6/8] arm: ns9xxx: Remove private irq flow handler Thomas Gleixner
@ 2011-02-03 7:56 ` Uwe Kleine-König
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Uwe Kleine-König @ 2011-02-03 7:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hi Thomas,
On Wed, Feb 02, 2011 at 09:41:27PM -0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> handle_prio_irq is almost identical with handle_fasteoi_irq. The
> subtle differences are
>
> 1) The handler checks for IRQ_DISABLED after the device handler has
> been called. In case it's set it masks the interrupt.
>
> 2) When the handler sees IRQ_DISABLED on entry it masks the interupt
> in the same way as handle_fastoei_irq, but does not set the
> IRQ_PENDING flag.
>
> 3) Instead of gracefully handling a recursive interrupt it crashes the
> kernel.
>
> #1 is just relevant when a device handler calls disable_irq_nosync()
> and it does not matter whether we mask the interrupt right away or
> not. We handle lazy masking for disable_irq anyway, so there is no
> real reason to have this extra mask in place.
>
> #2 will prevent the resend of a pending interrupt, which can result in
> lost interrupts for edge type interrupts. For level type interrupts
> the resend is a noop in the generic code. According to the
> datasheet all interrupts are level type, so marking them as such
> will result in the exact same behaviour as the private
> handle_prio_irq implementation.
>
> #3 is just stupid. Crashing the kernel instead of handling a problem
> gracefully is just wrong. With the current semantics- all handlers
> run with interrupts disabled - this is even more wrong.
>
> Rename ack to eoi, remove the unused mask_ack, switch to
> handle_fasteoi_irq and remove the private function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Uwe Kleine-Koenig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> Cc: linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
I have no access to a ns9xxx machine, but this looks sane.
Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-Koenig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Thanks
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-02-03 7:56 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20110202212258.546660886@linutronix.de>
2011-02-02 21:41 ` [patch 6/8] arm: ns9xxx: Remove private irq flow handler Thomas Gleixner
2011-02-03 7:56 ` Uwe Kleine-König
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).