From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: bigeasy@linutronix.de (Sebastian Andrzej Siewior)
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 21:24:28 +0100
Subject: [PATCH 4.4-rt2] fix
 arm-at91-pit-remove-irq-handler-when-clock-is-unused.patch
In-Reply-To: <20160118184247.GQ3367@piout.net>
References: <1452997394-8554-1-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
 <1452997394-8554-2-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
 <20160118172522.GB12309@linutronix.de> <20160118184247.GQ3367@piout.net>
Message-ID: <569D49FC.2050500@linutronix.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 01/18/2016 07:42 PM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 18/01/2016 at 18:25:22 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote :
>> * Alexandre Belloni | 2016-01-17 03:23:14 [+0100]:
>>
>>> index 80d74c4adcbe..43b50634d640 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-pit.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clocksource/timer-atmel-pit.c
>>> @@ -96,11 +96,44 @@ static int pit_clkevt_shutdown(struct clock_event_device *dev)
>>>
>>> 	/* disable irq, leaving the clocksource active */
>>> 	pit_write(data->base, AT91_PIT_MR, (data->cycle - 1) | AT91_PIT_PITEN);
>>> -	free_irq(atmel_pit_irq, data);
>>> +	if (!clockevent_state_detached(dev))
>>> +		free_irq(data->irq, data);
>>
>> I did it in the meantime without clockevent_state_detached(). From what
>> it looks, it first sets the state and then invokes
>> pit_clkevt_shutdown(). Any particular reason for this?
>>
> 
> Yeah, I forgot to mention that. Freeing the irq unconditionally
> results in:
?

> 
> 
> My understanding is that clockevents_exchange_device() changes the state
> from detached to shutdown and so at that point the IRQ has never been
> requested.

I see. So we get shutdown called twice while set_periodic was only
called once. In that case I would suggest to have internal bookkeeping
instead of relying on current core's behavior when it is time free the
irq.

> 

Sebastian