From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E7CC38394 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2024 15:03:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708355030; cv=none; b=fk1Re+QfSe6vJfie1JItmG9HX0pVm3Rj7IVWZjKqItymB9VE7jM6xbHE2Q5lRcJdIhpDDJRuArnqaF0M1jsA1RIyl0UavH4l1E6kbps0vWIe3+tMVIuavZXded3PVyCiJClfTjipmc3zT+hCwHEjhVaO8aGmXFdhK6vJ/ZJFasg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708355030; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ApvrSVTt2VQ9dXSMfqiGO+i5OycSSX99sOsBkR0FVNc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=G6WhlYAtd8t/3LQ9WEu2nWbNceXrQac3by1kB8dIAc7a7ZndI/skfmjR81rl5kgRnINPtF3xGg33crWybbrDkc6EvR0ueWjherysMomojfw+LYsE6m/e86p1aCr6zF4rOwRi9Y/EZNpf422Ayf4ZTZJoVyn6MV4lGrDVpzPrK5U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=uNo/oMBN; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=gkrYlyo1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="uNo/oMBN"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="gkrYlyo1" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1708355027; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=IC2X9BzxyD17RrC7x2W6QPthCzzd0SS8kYq0ja2PKLM=; b=uNo/oMBNB8lXr4rderd3q111++OVB+uxXDddj+uY0/uNQLQM4Frtyh3EYmHBaS7fmE7Bjv fB0X7gIcZSYaZosuF6bSdP+L8wLJ4fZ9lZf7P2u6IcJW5ey0ltsD6WCj9/LNbpm6g5Ks17 eVL3GNby30PawdTa0rBr+UQs3Nto9OuIa/Y7m0oV2reTKCkPGqOZmRAH6e/wforh8WEFV6 KqCejLsUwE9dm4s/Z7J4o1LIl0rb4D7lD7JJc2YSFq4F89nPEKacVlvA+LEXRujODGJ5SU pH5+FPKg20WG+dFFQtbbqTRdrIn384rPUEustAAKgM0dAAOSHp1qMSUkOP/agQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1708355027; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=IC2X9BzxyD17RrC7x2W6QPthCzzd0SS8kYq0ja2PKLM=; b=gkrYlyo1EdebKj/NoS6vbRsWdIOQ5XmPg8Wr+j/mBczLDlnIIl82doPXdrvh76ymEioAiR KhwiHYZhjuTHhhCw== To: Angus Chen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Angus Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: Fix irqs_unhandled in note_interrupt In-Reply-To: <20231128021043.2099-1-angus.chen@jaguarmicro.com> References: <20231128021043.2099-1-angus.chen@jaguarmicro.com> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 16:03:46 +0100 Message-ID: <874je4a431.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Tue, Nov 28 2023 at 10:10, Angus Chen wrote: > Commit 4f27c00bf80f ("Improve behaviour of spurious IRQ detect") > introduced a age of last_unhandled,after irq_count reached 100000, > we set irqs_unhandled = 0,but we didn't clear last_unhandled. We do nothing. Please write changelogs in passive voice. > So we can see the print of irq_spurious_proc_show is not consistent. > Like below: > root@jmkernel:~# cat /proc/irq/138/spurious > count 99998 > unhandled 1 > last_unhandled 1543930240 ms > > root@jmkernel:~# cat /proc/irq/138/spurious > count 0 > unhandled 0 > last_unhandled 1548915240 ms I can't figure out what you are trying to demonstrate here. > we can set last_unhandled=1 as a prompting message. This makes no sense either. > Signed-off-by: Angus Chen > --- > kernel/irq/spurious.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/irq/spurious.c b/kernel/irq/spurious.c > index 02b2daf07441..e883df04bdf1 100644 > --- a/kernel/irq/spurious.c > +++ b/kernel/irq/spurious.c > @@ -428,7 +428,7 @@ void note_interrupt(struct irq_desc *desc, irqreturn_t action_ret) > mod_timer(&poll_spurious_irq_timer, > jiffies + POLL_SPURIOUS_IRQ_INTERVAL); > } > - desc->irqs_unhandled = 0; > + desc->irqs_unhandled = 1; Why? Just to do some incomprehensible /proc/ output cosmetics instead of fixing the related procfs function? Thanks, tglx