From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexandre Belloni Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4-rt2] fix arm-at91-pit-remove-irq-handler-when-clock-is-unused.patch Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:22:47 +0100 Message-ID: <20160119012247.GV3367@piout.net> References: <1452997394-8554-1-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> <1452997394-8554-2-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> <20160118172522.GB12309@linutronix.de> <20160118184247.GQ3367@piout.net> <569D49FC.2050500@linutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Boris Brezillon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Ferre To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Return-path: Received: from down.free-electrons.com ([37.187.137.238]:35259 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756772AbcASBWt (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2016 20:22:49 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <569D49FC.2050500@linutronix.de> Sender: linux-rt-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 18/01/2016 at 21:24:28 +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote : > > > > My understanding is that clockevents_exchange_device() changes the state > > from detached to shutdown and so at that point the IRQ has never been > > requested. > > I see. So we get shutdown called twice while set_periodic was only > called once. In that case I would suggest to have internal bookkeeping > instead of relying on current core's behavior when it is time free the > irq. > Ok, I can do that. What should I base my patch on? -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com