Re: [ISSUE + PATCH] Interrupts were enabled early by spinlock guard

Nicolas Ferre
2025-08-25T15:05:37Z

On 25/08/2025 at 14:35, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> On 14/08/2025 at 17:28, Edgar Bonet wrote:
>> Hello Geert, and thanks for you prompt review!
>
> Yep, Geert, many thanks!
>
>>> I think the conversions in
>>> drivers/irqchip/irq-atmel-aic.c:aic_irq_domain_xlate() and
>>> drivers/irqchip/irq-loongson-liointc.c:liointc_set_type()
>>> are also wrong, and need a similar change.
>>
>> The one in irq-atmel-aic.c looks indeed strikingly similar. The one in
>> irq-loongson-liointc.c is slightly different though. Instead of:
>>
>> irq_gc_lock_irqsave() -> guard(raw_spinlock_irq)
>>
>> it does:
>>
>> irq_gc_lock_irqsave() -> guard(raw_spinlock)
>>
>> I don't know what the implications are though.
>>
>>> Unfortunately I have no hardware to verify.
>>
>> Neither do I.
>
> I'm on it. Expect feedback later today...

Answering to myself: tested working okay on at91sam9x35ek board (with
IRQ controller matching compatible string "atmel,at91rm9200-aic"
(handled by file irq-atmel-aic.c) and your modification:

--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-atmel-aic.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-atmel-aic.c
@@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int aic_irq_domain_xlate(struct irq_domain *d,

gc = dgc->gc[idx];

- guard(raw_spinlock_irq)(&gc->lock);
+ guard(raw_spinlock_irqsave)(&gc->lock);
smr = irq_reg_readl(gc, AT91_AIC_SMR(*out_hwirq));
aic_common_set_priority(intspec[2], &smr);
irq_reg_writel(gc, smr, AT91_AIC_SMR(*out_hwirq));

Thanks, best regards,
Nicolas

> Thanks so much for the heads-up.
>
> Best regards,
> Nicolas
>