public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [patch] __do_IRQ does not check IRQ_DISABLED when IRQ_PER_CPU is set
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 11:26:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071030162657.GA21728@sgi.com> (raw)

[patch] __do_IRQ does not check IRQ_DISABLED when IRQ_PER_CPU is set

In __do_IRQ(), the normal case is that IRQ_DISABLED is checked and if
set the handler (handle_IRQ_event()) is not called.  

Earlier in __do_IRQ(), if IRQ_PER_CPU is set the code does not check
IRQ_DISABLED and calls the handler even though IRQ_DISABLED is set.
This behavior seems unintentional.

One user encountering this behavior is the CPE handler (in 
arch/ia64/kernel/mca.c).  When the CPE handler encounters too many
CPEs (such as a solid single bit error), it sets up a polling timer
and disables the CPE interrupt (to avoid excessive overhead logging
the stream of single bit errors).  disable_irq_nosync() is called
which sets IRQ_DISABLED.  The IRQ_PER_CPU flag was previously set
(in ia64_mca_late_init()).  The net result is the CPE handler gets
called even though it is marked disabled.

If the behavior of not checking IRQ_DISABLED when IRQ_PER_CPU is
set is intentional, it would be worthy of a comment describing 
the intended behavior.  disable_irq_nosync() does call chip->disable()
to provide a chipset specifiec interface for disabling the interrupt,
which avoids this issue when used.

Comments???

Signed-off-by: Russ Anderson (rja@sgi.com)

--------------------------------------------------------------------
---
 kernel/irq/handle.c |    8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Index: linus/kernel/irq/handle.c
===================================================================
--- linus.orig/kernel/irq/handle.c	2007-10-30 09:49:26.000000000 -0500
+++ linus/kernel/irq/handle.c	2007-10-30 10:23:52.436719688 -0500
@@ -178,9 +178,11 @@ fastcall unsigned int __do_IRQ(unsigned 
 		 */
 		if (desc->chip->ack)
 			desc->chip->ack(irq);
-		action_ret = handle_IRQ_event(irq, desc->action);
-		if (!noirqdebug)
-			note_interrupt(irq, desc, action_ret);
+		if (likely(!(desc->status & IRQ_DISABLED))) {
+			action_ret = handle_IRQ_event(irq, desc->action);
+			if (!noirqdebug)
+				note_interrupt(irq, desc, action_ret);
+		}
 		desc->chip->end(irq);
 		return 1;
 	}
-- 
Russ Anderson, OS RAS/Partitioning Project Lead  
SGI - Silicon Graphics Inc          rja@sgi.com

             reply	other threads:[~2007-10-30 16:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-30 16:26 Russ Anderson [this message]
2007-10-30 22:22 ` [patch] __do_IRQ does not check IRQ_DISABLED when IRQ_PER_CPU is set Andrew Morton
2007-10-31 16:20 ` Luck, Tony
2007-10-31 20:00   ` Russ Anderson

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=20071030162657.GA21728@sgi.com \
    --to=rja@sgi.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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