public inbox for linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@linux.intel.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: TWL4030 IRQ
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:30:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090804133041.GC8601@sortiz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090804105100.GK24334@atomide.com>

Hi Tony,

On Tue, Aug 04, 2009 at 01:51:00PM +0300, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk> [090803 20:26]:
> > On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 06:36:12PM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> > > Hi Santosh,
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 11:30:48AM +0530, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> > > > From: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
> > > > 
> > > > (Rebased on 2.6.31-rc4)
> > > > 
> > > > The TWL4030 IRQ handler has a bug which leads to spinlock lock-up. It is
> > > > calling the 'unmask' function in a process context. :The mask/unmask/ack
> > > > functions are only designed to be called from the IRQ handler code,
> > > > or the proper API interfaces found in linux/interrupt.h.
> > > > 
> > > > Also there is no need to have IRQ chaining mechanism. The right way to
> > > > handle this is to claim the parent interrupt as a standard interrupt
> > > > and arrange for handle_twl4030_pih to take care of the rest of the devices.
> > > I'd like this one to be split in 2 different patches as you're addressing 2
> > > different issues here.
> > 
> > You'd like me to remove the IRQ handling entirely from this code as one
> > patch, thereby breaking it, and then add the new IRQ handling as a
> > separate patch?
> > 
> > Are you sure?
> > 
> > I really don't think so, and I suspect you haven't even read the patch.
> > 
> > It's all _one_ issue, with two explainations of why the current code is
> > wrong.
> > 
> > So my reply is: unable to split patch.
> 
> Yeah I guess the description "Also there is no need.." above could be
> just "This is fixed by not using IRQ chaining mechanism" if anything.
Yep, I was mislead by the description, but I also didnt look at the patch
carefully enough.

 
> Anyways would be nice to get this in as a fix.
I applied it to my for-next branch for now, and I'll also try to have Linus
pulling it.

Cheers,
Samuel.


> Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>

-- 
Intel Open Source Technology Centre
http://oss.intel.com/

  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-04 13:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-27  6:00 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: TWL4030 IRQ Santosh Shilimkar
2009-08-01 12:50 ` Shilimkar, Santosh
2009-08-03 16:36 ` Samuel Ortiz
2009-08-03 17:23   ` Russell King
2009-08-04 10:51     ` Tony Lindgren
2009-08-04 13:30       ` Samuel Ortiz [this message]
2009-08-04 13:59         ` Shilimkar, Santosh

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=20090804133041.GC8601@sortiz.org \
    --to=sameo@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
    --cc=tony@atomide.com \
    /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