From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] staging: omap-thermal: use spin_lock_irqsave inside IRQ handler Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 22:16:18 +0300 Message-ID: <20130318191618.GU9138@mwanda> References: <1363618756-15851-1-git-send-email-eduardo.valentin@ti.com> <1363618756-15851-3-git-send-email-eduardo.valentin@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:29024 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753168Ab3CRTQh (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Mar 2013 15:16:37 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1363618756-15851-3-git-send-email-eduardo.valentin@ti.com> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Eduardo Valentin Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:59:10AM -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > Even if the IRQ is not firing because it is ONE_SHOT and disable > at INTC level, the IRQ handler must use spin_lock_irqsave. > It is necessary to disable IRQs from the current > CPU while it is holding a spin_lock which is need. > Gar... I think I was just totally wrong on this. I think your original code was fine. Sorry Eduardo and Greg. This is a threaded IRQ so the regular spin_lock is fine or even the mutex would have been. IRQ_ONESHOT is about triggering a second IRQ before the first one has been finished, btw. I am an idiot. regards, dan carpenter