From: adharmap@codeaurora.org (Abhijeet Dharmapurikar)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] GIC: Assign correct flow handler type in set_type callback
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2010 02:39:25 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D1DB2DD.3020701@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimA8ZP4WL8u0Uvtt-0MWXPkGfjwQ7437pL-h0D-@mail.gmail.com>
On 12/29/2010 10:27 PM, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
> <adharmap@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> There are some interrupts that are true edge triggered in nature. If not
>> marked IRQ_PENDING, when disabled, they will be lost.
>>
>> Use the set_type callback to assign the correct flow type handler for
>> shared peripheral interrupts.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar<adharmap@codeaurora.org>
>> ---
>> This came to light when a edge triggered interrupt was supposed to wakeup the
>> sytem. The flow handler was set to the default handle_level_irq. On the resume
>> path the flow handler was invoked right after the I bit was cleared but before
>> each individual interrupts were enabled. This made the handle_level_irq ignore
>
> Why does the flow handler hit when the interrupt is disabled? Have you set
> IRQF_NOSUSPEND on this interrupt?
>
Since GIC doesnt have disable callback it implements lazy disabling. The
interrupt is only marked IRQ_DISABLED in the descriptor but is not
masked in the GIC. Hence the interrupt flow handler is hit.
Now that I re-read the code setting IRQF_NO_SUSPEND would fix the issue.
But shouldnt set_irq_wake() do something similar?
Do I need to request IRQF_NO_SUSPEND for all the interrupts that could
possibly wakeup the system - seems a bit unnecessary. IMO the interrupt
should not be disabled if it is marked IRQF_NO_SUPEND || IRQ_WAKEUP is set.
Abhijeet
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-31 10:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-30 5:29 [PATCH] GIC: Assign correct flow handler type in set_type callback Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
2010-12-30 6:27 ` Rabin Vincent
2010-12-31 10:39 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar [this message]
2011-01-02 6:26 ` 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=4D1DB2DD.3020701@codeaurora.org \
--to=adharmap@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 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).