From: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@codeaurora.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC IRQ] genirq: fix handle_nested_irq for lazy disable
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 10:22:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CC9B167.8010401@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1010270909590.3100@localhost6.localdomain6>
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> index baa5c4a..35ccc41 100644
>> --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
>> @@ -419,6 +419,7 @@ void handle_nested_irq(unsigned int irq)
>> {
>> struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
>> struct irqaction *action;
>> + int mask_this_irq = 0;
>> irqreturn_t action_ret;
>>
>> might_sleep();
>> @@ -428,8 +429,10 @@ void handle_nested_irq(unsigned int irq)
>> kstat_incr_irqs_this_cpu(irq, desc);
>>
>> action = desc->action;
>> - if (unlikely(!action || (desc->status & IRQ_DISABLED)))
>> + if (unlikely(!action || (desc->status & IRQ_DISABLED))) {
>> + mask_this_irq = 1;
>> goto out_unlock;
>> + }
>>
>> desc->status |= IRQ_INPROGRESS;
>> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&desc->lock);e
>> @@ -443,6 +446,11 @@ void handle_nested_irq(unsigned int irq)
>>
>> out_unlock:
>> raw_spin_unlock_irq(&desc->lock);
>> + if (unlikely(mask_this_irq)) {
>> + chip_bus_lock(irq, desc);
>> + desc->chip->mask(irq);
>
> That does not work with current mainline due to the irq_chip changes,
> can you please respin against linus latest?
Sure will address this in the next patch.
>
> Also there is no requirement for irq_chip instances to implement the
> mask function, so this might crash the kernel for innocent users of
> that infrastructure. mask_irq() is your friend.
Thanks, this one too.
>
> Aside of that this wont work for edge triggered interrupts, as you'd
> loose the edge, so this needs more thought and a thorough look at the
> users of handle_nested_irq().
I didn't understand this though. This patch will mask the interrupt in
the controller even if it were edge. My interrupt controller latches
edges and wants a mask (or an ack) to be executed to deactivate the line
summary line. Do you mean that I should mark the interrupt IRQ_PENDING
if it were an edge before masking it? If not, can you please explain.
Thanks,
Abhijeet
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-10-28 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-27 1:50 [RFC IRQ] genirq: fix handle_nested_irq for lazy disable adharmap
2010-10-27 8:01 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-10-28 17:22 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar [this message]
2010-10-28 18:52 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-10-29 0:04 ` Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
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=4CC9B167.8010401@codeaurora.org \
--to=adharmap@codeaurora.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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