From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: PROBLEM: BUG appearing when trying to allocate interrupt on Exynos MCT after CPU hotplug
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 17:08:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54CC2B18.2070809@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5450C391.2070007@samsung.com>
Kept meaning to get back to this thread. Have you resolved it?
On 10/29/14 03:38, Marcin Jabrzyk wrote:
> So I've tried this patch, it resolves one problem but introduces also
> new ones. As expected the BUG warning is not showing after applying
> this patch but there are some interesting side effects.
Well that's half good news.
> I was looking on /proc/interrupts output. IRQ for CPU0 have "MCT" name
> and IRQ for CPU1 has unexpectedly no name at all.
This is pretty confusing. I don't see how the patch could cause this to
happen.
> After making hotplug cycle of CPU1 I've observed that IRQs attached
> originally for that CPU are generating on really low count and not in
> order with IRQ for CPU0.
> What's more the interrupt for CPU1 is showing to me as being counted
> for both CPUs, so it's probably not being attached to CPU1.
>
yeah. Can you give the output of /proc/timer_list in addition to
/proc/interrupts? It may give some hints on what's going on. It may also
be interesting to see if irq_force_affinity() is failing. Please check
the return value and print an error
diff --git a/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c b/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c
index 1800053b4644..3c4538e26731 100644
--- a/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c
+++ b/drivers/clocksource/exynos_mct.c
@@ -450,6 +450,7 @@ static int exynos4_local_timer_setup(struct clock_event_device *evt)
{
struct mct_clock_event_device *mevt;
unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+ int ret;
mevt = container_of(evt, struct mct_clock_event_device, evt);
@@ -468,7 +469,9 @@ static int exynos4_local_timer_setup(struct clock_event_device *evt)
if (mct_int_type == MCT_INT_SPI) {
evt->irq = mct_irqs[MCT_L0_IRQ + cpu];
enable_irq(evt->irq);
- irq_force_affinity(mct_irqs[MCT_L0_IRQ + cpu], cpumask_of(cpu));
+ ret = irq_force_affinity(mct_irqs[MCT_L0_IRQ + cpu], cpumask_of(cpu));
+ if (ret)
+ pr_err("force failed %d\n", ret);
} else {
enable_percpu_irq(mct_irqs[MCT_L0_IRQ], 0);
}
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-31 1:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-23 13:51 PROBLEM: BUG appearing when trying to allocate interrupt on Exynos MCT after CPU hotplug Marcin Jabrzyk
2014-10-23 14:06 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2014-10-23 18:41 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-10-24 13:22 ` Marcin Jabrzyk
2014-10-27 20:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-10-29 10:38 ` Marcin Jabrzyk
2015-01-31 1:08 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2015-01-31 9:21 ` Daniel Lezcano
2015-02-02 8:47 ` Marcin Jabrzyk
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=54CC2B18.2070809@codeaurora.org \
--to=sboyd@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).