From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 16:22:48 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2 01/26] genirq: add irq_domain-aware core IRQ handler
In-Reply-To: <53FCD60E.1030009@codeaurora.org>
References: <1409047421-27649-1-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com>
 <1409047421-27649-2-git-send-email-marc.zyngier@arm.com>
 <53FCC714.3090206@codeaurora.org> <53FCCCC7.9070801@arm.com>
 <53FCD60E.1030009@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <20140901152248.GA30405@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:46:38AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Ah ok. This is the multi-irq handler case? Has this been broken since
> v3.2 at least for the gic users? Now that we call irq_enter()/irq_exit()
> a lot more code runs, including things like updating jiffies when
> interrupts arrive and invoking softirq? Do we only call irq_exit() on
> the IPI path otherwise?
> 
> Are there any plans to send this back to stable trees? Not calling
> irq_enter()/irq_exit() when we get an interrupt seems like a big problem.

gic_handle_irq() calls handle_IRQ() which has the irq_enter()..irq_exit()
wrappers.

If we didn't have irq_exit(), then softirq's would be totally broken on
all gic-based platforms.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.