From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7EB01A0EDE for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 02:44:51 +1100 (AEDT) Message-ID: <1420641876.5830.32.camel@kernel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] PPC: MPIC: necessary readback after EOI? From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Scott Wood Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 15:44:36 +0100 In-Reply-To: <1420481454.4961.16.camel@freescale.com> References: <20150105174616.GA3159@rhlx01.hs-esslingen.de> <1420481454.4961.16.camel@freescale.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Purcareata Bogdan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andreas Mohr List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2015-01-05 at 12:10 -0600, Scott Wood wrote: > It would have been nice if a code comment explained why it was doing the > readback... I don't see any particular need to wait for EOI completion > here (unlike when masking). The EOI is what causes the MPIC to drop it's EE output to the CPU, if the EOI is processed too slowly & asynchronously (posted write + 33Mhz MPIC) we observe cases of spurrious interrupts. We had some macs basically getting a spurrious irq for every MPIC interrupts... Cheers, Ben.