From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael =?ISO-8859-1?Q?B=FCsch?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] cbus-retu: Fix nested IRQ handling Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 15:16:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1298902574.26482.8.camel@maggie> References: <1298827021.30857.16.camel@marge> <20110228083629.GI2459@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> (sfid-20110228_093639_404968_FFFFFFFFE1932FBC) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 80-190-117-144.ip-home.de ([80.190.117.144]:48617 "EHLO bu3sch.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754397Ab1B1OQU (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Feb 2011 09:16:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20110228083629.GI2459@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> (sfid-20110228_093639_404968_FFFFFFFFE1932FBC) Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: balbi@ti.com Cc: Tony Lindgren , linux-omap On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 10:36 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 06:17:01PM +0100, Michael Buesch wrote: > > handle_nested_irq() expects a global IRQ number, so > > the irq_base has to be added to the RETU irq number. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch > > Good catch, while at that, could you also cook another patch to add > locking on retu_irq_handler ? We are using the internal lockless > version of the read/write functions, so we need to hold the mutex before > reading/writing to avoid problems. Ok, it probably is safe without locking (due to the reads being atomic), but I agree that it's more robust to add some locking here. I'll send a patch. -- Greetings Michael.