public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: tglx@linutronix.de (Thomas Gleixner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] genirq: provide means to retrigger parent
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:36:47 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1210240033310.2756@ionos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871ugo7rqv.fsf@deeprootsystems.com>

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote:

> Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> writes:
> 
> > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 03:07:49PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> >> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> >> 
> >> Attempts to retrigger nested threaded IRQs currently fail because they
> >> have no primary handler.  In order to support retrigger of nested
> >> IRQs, the parent IRQ needs to be retriggered.
> >> 
> >> To fix, when an IRQ needs to be resent, if the interrupt has a parent
> >> IRQ and runs in the context of the parent IRQ, then resend the parent.
> >> 
> >> Also, handle_nested_irq() needs to clear the replay flag like the
> >> other handlers, otherwise check_irq_resend() will set it and it will
> >> never be cleared.  Without clearing, it results in the first resend
> >> working fine, but check_irq_resend() returning early on subsequent
> >> resends because the replay flag is still set.
> >> 
> >> Problem discovered on ARM/OMAP platforms where a nested IRQ that's
> >> also a wakeup IRQ happens late in suspend and needed to be retriggered
> >> during the resume process.
> >> 
> >> Reported-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
> >> Tested-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
> >> [khilman at ti.com: changelog edits, clear IRQS_REPLAY in handle_nested_irq()]
> >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> >
> > Umm, we also have the converse situation.  We have platforms where the
> > resend has to be done from the child IRQ, and the parent must not be
> > touched.  I hope that doesn't break those.
> 
> I'm assuming the child IRQs you're concerned with are not threaded,
> right?  This patch only addresses nested, threaded IRQs, and these don't
> have a primary handler to run at all, so cannot do any triggering.

And it involves that you activly set the parent irq via the new
interface: irq_set_parent()

You don't have that yet or you don't use that in your future changes,
then you're good. :)

Thanks,

	tglx

      reply	other threads:[~2012-10-23 22:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-16 22:07 [PATCH] genirq: provide means to retrigger parent Kevin Hilman
2012-10-16 22:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-10-23 22:23   ` Kevin Hilman
2012-10-23 22:36     ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]

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=alpine.LFD.2.02.1210240033310.2756@ionos \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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