From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262304AbTJIRRK (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 13:17:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262312AbTJIRRK (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 13:17:10 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:38800 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262304AbTJIRRF (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Oct 2003 13:17:05 -0400 Message-ID: <3F859802.4060607@pobox.com> Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2003 13:16:50 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030703 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt CC: Manfred Spraul , Linus Torvalds , viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk, Linux Kernel list Subject: Re: [RFC] disable_irq()/enable_irq() semantics and ide-probe.c References: <3F858885.1070202@colorfullife.com> <3F858EF8.5080105@pobox.com> <1065718629.663.3.camel@gaston> <3F8594CD.1030504@pobox.com> <1065719227.663.6.camel@gaston> In-Reply-To: <1065719227.663.6.camel@gaston> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 19:03, Jeff Garzik wrote: > > >>Easily solved with a synchronize_irq() ;-) > > > No. synchronize_irq will do nothing to an irq that is > still somewhere in the HW path from the device to the core, > and even in the core it may be queued for some cycles before > actually delivered. hmmm, ok :) Well my main objection is disable_irq+free_irq+enable_irq. Seems to me we'll wind up coding around that. Maybe a free_and_enable_irq is appropriate to avoid such a situation? Oh well, just thinking out loud... Jeff