linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>
To: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Add hard_irq_disable()
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 12:15:55 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a781481a0705092345rf9fdc9cs8495516299a28fae@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070509224113.cca81a24.akpm@linux-foundation.org>

Hi Andrew,

On 5/10/07, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 May 2007 15:25:58 +1000 Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> > --- linux-cell.orig/include/linux/interrupt.h 2007-05-10 14:51:22.000000000 +1000
> > +++ linux-cell/include/linux/interrupt.h      2007-05-10 15:18:04.000000000 +1000
> > @@ -241,6 +241,16 @@ static inline void __deprecated save_and
> >  #define save_and_cli(x)      save_and_cli(&x)
> >  #endif /* CONFIG_SMP */
> >
> > +/* Some architectures might implement lazy enabling/disabling of
> > + * interrupts. In some cases, such as stop_machine, we might want
> > + * to ensure that after a local_irq_disable(), interrupts have
> > + * really been disabled in hardware. Such architectures need to
> > + * implement the following hook.
> > + */
> > +#ifndef hard_irq_disable
> > +#define hard_irq_disable()   do { } while(0)
> > +#endif
>
> We absolutely require that the architecture's hard_irq_disable() be defined
> when we do this.  If it happens that the definition of hard_irq_disable()
> is implemented three levels deep in nested includes then we risk getting
> into a situation where different .c files see different implementations of
> hard_irq_disable(), which could lead to confusing results, to say the least.

So you're saying that this mechanism forces the arch (that really
wants hard_irq_disable) to _#define_ hard_irq_disable (as a macro),
and if it implements it as an inline function, for example, then we're
screwed?

> Your implementation comes via the inclusion of system.h which then includes
> hw_irq.h.  That's perhaps a little fragile and it would be better to
>
> a) include in the comment the name of the arch file which must implement
>    hard_irq_disable() and
>
> b) include that file directly from this one.

Hmmm. How about:

1. Introduce some CONFIG_WANTS_HARD_IRQ_DISABLE that is #defined (or
left undefined) by the arch/.../defconfig (depending upon whether or
not that arch implements a hard_irq_disable() for itself or not)

2. Then pull-in that code into include/linux/interrupt.h somehow
(through some known / fixed header file, or through asm/system.h, or
anyhow -- it doesn't really matter)

3. And:

#ifndef CONFIG_WANTS_HARD_IRQ_DISABLE
#define hard_irq_disable() do { } while(0)
#endif

We don't need to standardize on some particular arch-specific header
filename in this case.

Comments?

Satyam

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-05-10  6:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-05-10  5:25 [PATCH 2/3] Add hard_irq_disable() Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-05-10  5:41 ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-10  6:35   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-05-10  7:35     ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-10  8:41       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-05-10  8:49         ` David Miller
2007-05-10  8:50         ` Andrew Morton
2007-05-10  8:53           ` David Miller
2007-05-10  9:29             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-05-10 11:01               ` Josh Boyer
2007-05-10  6:45   ` Satyam Sharma [this message]
2007-05-10  7:21     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-05-10  7:54       ` Satyam Sharma
2007-05-10  8:46         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt

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=a781481a0705092345rf9fdc9cs8495516299a28fae@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=satyam.sharma@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).