From: slash.tmp@free.fr (Mason)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Disabling an interrupt in the handler locks the system up
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:56:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <580F647B.5000202@free.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <534c4588-f220-25a3-e7aa-84484f348bd1@arm.com>
On 25/10/2016 12:45, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 25/10/16 09:36, Mason wrote:
>> On 25/10/2016 10:29, Sebastian Frias wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/24/2016 06:55 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2016, Mason wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> For the record, setting the IRQ_DISABLE_UNLAZY flag for this device
>>>>> makes the system lock-up disappear.
>>>>
>>>> The way how lazy irq disabling works is:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Interrupt is marked disabled in software, but the hardware is not masked
>>>>
>>>> 2) If the interrupt fires befor the interrupt is reenabled, then it's
>>>> masked at the hardware level in the low level interrupt flow handler.
>>>
>>> Would you mind explaining what is the intention behind?
>>> Because it does not seem obvious why there isn't a direct map between
>>> "disable_irq*()" and "mask_irq()"
>>
>> I had a similar, but slightly different question:
>>
>> What is the difference between struct irq_chip's
>>
>> * @irq_shutdown: shut down the interrupt (defaults to ->disable if NULL)
>> * @irq_disable: disable the interrupt
>> * @irq_mask: mask an interrupt source
>
> One important difference between disable and mask is that disable is
> perfectly allowed not to care about pending signals, whereas mask must
> preserve an interrupt becoming pending whilst masked.
(For my information)
Is it correct to say that "mask" is supposed to defer any interrupt
until sometime later; while "disable" will simply discard incoming
interrupts, losing them forever.
Is the irq_mask() call-back exposed via some module-visible API?
include/linux/interrupt.h documents mostly enable/disable variants.
extern void disable_irq_nosync(unsigned int irq);
extern bool disable_hardirq(unsigned int irq);
extern void disable_irq(unsigned int irq);
extern void disable_percpu_irq(unsigned int irq);
extern void enable_irq(unsigned int irq);
extern void enable_percpu_irq(unsigned int irq, unsigned int type);
extern bool irq_percpu_is_enabled(unsigned int irq);
extern void irq_wake_thread(unsigned int irq, void *dev_id);
Regards.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-25 13:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-21 16:37 Disabling an interrupt in the handler locks the system up Mason
2016-10-21 17:46 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-21 18:39 ` Mason
2016-10-21 19:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-21 19:47 ` Mason
2016-10-21 19:49 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-10-21 20:27 ` Mason
2016-10-22 11:37 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-22 23:10 ` Mason
2016-10-24 8:17 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-24 16:12 ` Mason
2016-10-24 16:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-10-25 8:29 ` Sebastian Frias
2016-10-25 8:36 ` Mason
2016-10-25 10:45 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-10-25 13:56 ` Mason [this message]
2016-10-25 13:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-10-25 9:20 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=580F647B.5000202@free.fr \
--to=slash.tmp@free.fr \
--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).