From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] genirq: Add chip hooks for taking CPUs on/off line.
Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2011 21:51:13 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1103192050400.2787@localhost6.localdomain6> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1300484916-11133-2-git-send-email-ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
On Fri, 18 Mar 2011, David Daney wrote:
> --- a/include/linux/irqdesc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/irqdesc.h
> @@ -178,6 +178,12 @@ static inline int irq_has_action(unsigned int irq)
> return desc->action != NULL;
> }
>
> +/* Test to see if the irq is currently enabled */
> +static inline int irq_desc_is_enabled(struct irq_desc *desc)
> +{
> + return desc->depth == 0;
> +}
That want's to go into kernel/irq/internal.h
> #ifndef CONFIG_GENERIC_HARDIRQS_NO_COMPAT
> static inline int irq_balancing_disabled(unsigned int irq)
> {
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c
> index c9c0601..40736f7 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
> @@ -689,3 +689,38 @@ void irq_modify_status(unsigned int irq, unsigned long clr, unsigned long set)
>
> irq_put_desc_unlock(desc, flags);
> }
> +
> +void irq_cpu_online(unsigned int irq)
Odd function name. It does not reflect that this is for per cpu
interrupts. So something like irq_xxx_per_cpu_irq(irq)
might be a bit more descriptive.
> +{
So that's called on the cpu which goes online, right?
I wonder whether we can add any sanity check to verify this.
Though I would not worry too much about it. Calling that from a cpu
which is not going offline should have enough nasty side effects that
it's noticed during development. :)
> + unsigned long flags;
> + struct irq_chip *chip;
> + struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
Needs to check !desc
> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&desc->lock, flags);
> +
> + chip = irq_data_get_irq_chip(&desc->irq_data);
> +
> + if (chip && chip->irq_cpu_online)
> + chip->irq_cpu_online(&desc->irq_data,
> + irq_desc_is_enabled(desc));
> +
> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
> +}
> +
> +void irq_cpu_offline(unsigned int irq)
> +{
> + unsigned long flags;
> + struct irq_chip *chip;
> + struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
See above.
Style nit: I prefer ordering:
+ struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
+ struct irq_chip *chip;
+ unsigned long flags;
For some reason, probably because I'm used to it, that's easier to
parse. But don't worry about that, I'll turn it around before sticking
it into git. :)
Otherwise I'm fine with the approach itself.
Though one question remains: should we just iterate over the irq space
and call the online/offline callbacks when available instead of having
the arch code do the iteration.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-19 20:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-18 21:48 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add IRQ chip hooks for taking CPUs on/off line David Daney
2011-03-18 21:48 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] genirq: Add " David Daney
2011-03-19 20:51 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2011-03-21 18:26 ` David Daney
2011-03-21 21:13 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-03-23 22:03 ` David Daney
2011-03-23 22:09 ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-03-18 21:48 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] MIPS: Octeon: Rewrite interrupt handling code David Daney
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.1103192050400.2787@localhost6.localdomain6 \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.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