Re: [patch 2.6.18-rc1] genirq: {en,dis}able_irq_wake() need refcounting too

[Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 10:13:40AM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 10:58:49AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > It's not just "normal" mode operation that needs refcounting for the 
> > > {en,dis}able_irq() calls ... "wakeup" mode calls need it too, for the 
> > > very same reasons.
> > > 
> > > This patch adds that refcounting.  I expect that some ARM drivers will 
> > > be triggering the new warning, but this call isn't yet widely used. 
> > > (Which is probably why the bug has lingered this long...)
> > 
> > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> > 
> > we should also add disable_irq_wake() / enable_irq_wake() APIs and start 
> > migrating most ARM users over to the new APIs, agreed? That makes the 
> > APIs more symmetric and the code more readable too.
> 
> That _is_ the API anyway.  set_irq_wake() was never intended to be called
> directly from drivers.

Also note that genirq has a bigger problem to fry at the moment - it's
currently broken for ARM SMP + hotplug CPU due to missing functionality
(as in, the kernel doesn't even link.)  Thomas has a patch which is
going through the test mills at the moment.

Let's first get genirq to a point where it's a direct replacement for
my IRQ subsystem before thinking about changing existing APIs (and
thereby possibly introducing other breakage.)

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core