public inbox for linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Nicolas Dufresne <nicolas@ndufresne.ca>,
	Stefan Klug <stefan.klug@ideasonboard.com>,
	Xavier Roumegue <xavier.roumegue@oss.nxp.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] media: dw100: Split interrupt handler to fix timeout error
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2026 01:44:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260105234452.GH10026@pendragon.ideasonboard.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260105163748.2488d506@gandalf.local.home>

On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 04:37:48PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2026 14:03:58 -0500 Nicolas Dufresne wrote:
> > Le lundi 05 janvier 2026 à 12:35 +0100, Stefan Klug a écrit :
> > > In the previous commit, the interrupt handler was changed to threaded.
> > > This sometimes leads to DW100_INTERRUPT_STATUS_INT_ERR_TIME_OUT being
> > > set after changing the vertex map. This can be seen by repeated error
> > > outputs in dmesg:
> > > 
> > > dw100 32e30000.dwe: Interrupt error: 0x1
> > > 
> > > As there is no documentation available, it is unclear why that happens
> > > and if this condition can simply be ignored. By splitting the interrupt
> > > handling into two parts and only handling the dw100_job_finish() within
> > > the threaded part, the error does not occur anymore.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Klug <stefan.klug@ideasonboard.com>  
> > 
> > Ok, but arguably, this could be squashed.

Stefan mentioned that in the cover letter, yes. The patches are
currently split because 4/4 shouldn't be needed based on our
understanding of the hardware. We're hoping for feedback on the issue
from someone with knowledge of the DW100 and access to its
documentation.

> Agreed. Because it doesn't seem to make sense to have a oneshot threaded
> irq handler that doesn't have the two parts (non-threaded to acknowledge the
> irq, and the threaded to handle it and re-enable it).

Why is so ? Isn't oneshot meant exactly for this purpose ? It's
documented as not reenabling the interrupt after the hardirq handler
(which is absent after 3/4) returns, why would a hardirq handler be
mandatory then ?

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

  reply	other threads:[~2026-01-05 23:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-01-05 11:35 [PATCH 0/4] media: dw100: Dynamic vertex map updates and fixes for PREEMPT_RT Stefan Klug
2026-01-05 11:35 ` [PATCH 1/4] media: dw100: Implement V4L2 requests support Stefan Klug
2026-01-05 18:46   ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06  0:33     ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06 14:16       ` Stefan Klug
2026-01-06 14:35         ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06 14:59           ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06 15:44             ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06 14:53         ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06 15:41           ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06 15:45             ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06 15:56               ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06 17:25                 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-05 11:35 ` [PATCH 2/4] media: dw100: Implement dynamic vertex map update Stefan Klug
2026-01-05 18:58   ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06  0:42     ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06 13:47       ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06 14:29         ` Stefan Klug
2026-01-06 15:27           ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-06 17:30             ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06 14:35         ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-05 11:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] media: dw100: Fix kernel oops with PREEMPT_RT enabled Stefan Klug
2026-01-05 19:02   ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-05 23:59     ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06  0:39       ` Steven Rostedt
2026-01-06  0:49         ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06 17:11           ` Stefan Klug
2026-01-12 11:43             ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-01-14 17:22               ` Stefan Klug
2026-01-23  8:24                 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-01-05 11:35 ` [PATCH 4/4] media: dw100: Split interrupt handler to fix timeout error Stefan Klug
2026-01-05 19:03   ` Nicolas Dufresne
2026-01-05 21:37     ` Steven Rostedt
2026-01-05 23:44       ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2026-01-06  0:43         ` Steven Rostedt
2026-01-06  0:51           ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-06  0:57             ` Steven Rostedt

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=20260105234452.GH10026@pendragon.ideasonboard.com \
    --to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
    --cc=nicolas@ndufresne.ca \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=stefan.klug@ideasonboard.com \
    --cc=xavier.roumegue@oss.nxp.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