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
next 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