From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>
To: zhuguangqing83@gmail.com, Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@samsung.com>,
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>
Cc: linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: Fix missing IRQF_ONESHOT as only threaded handler
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:13:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <342f2c09-87a8-571e-e032-d954de4cf2fc@canonical.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210416021949.1569-1-zhuguangqing83@gmail.com>
On 16/04/2021 04:19, zhuguangqing83@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Guangqing Zhu <zhuguangqing83@gmail.com>
>
> Coccinelle noticed:
> 1. drivers/rtc/rtc-s5m.c:810:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 2. drivers/rtc/rtc-rk808.c:441:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 3. drivers/rtc/rtc-max77686.c:779:7-27: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 4. drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c:415:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 5. drivers/rtc/rtc-lp8788.c:277:8-33: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 6. drivers/rtc/rtc-max8998.c:283:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 7. drivers/rtc/rtc-rc5t583.c:241:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 8. drivers/rtc/rtc-max8997.c:495:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
> handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
>
> Signed-off-by: Guangqing Zhu <zhuguangqing83@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-lp8788.c | 2 +-
> drivers/rtc/rtc-max77686.c | 4 ++--
> drivers/rtc/rtc-max8997.c | 2 +-
> drivers/rtc/rtc-max8998.c | 3 ++-
> drivers/rtc/rtc-rc5t583.c | 2 +-
> drivers/rtc/rtc-rk808.c | 2 +-
> drivers/rtc/rtc-s5m.c | 4 ++--
The commit msg suggests in misleading way that there is an issue here to
solve but at least for max* and s5m it is not true. These are nested
interrupts.
I tested *only* the S5M:
Tested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>
but still I wonder - why this change is needed, except satisfying blind
Coccinelle runs? Does it really bring benefit for the nested interrupts?
Best regards,
Krzysztof
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-16 9:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-16 2:19 [PATCH] rtc: Fix missing IRQF_ONESHOT as only threaded handler zhuguangqing83
2021-04-16 8:44 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2021-04-16 9:13 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
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=342f2c09-87a8-571e-e032-d954de4cf2fc@canonical.com \
--to=krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com \
--cc=a.zummo@towertech.it \
--cc=alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com \
--cc=b.zolnierkie@samsung.com \
--cc=cw00.choi@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zhuguangqing83@gmail.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