From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 5C168D286 for ; Wed, 6 Dec 2023 04:02:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="jjDu4Syq" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8A2DCC433C8; Wed, 6 Dec 2023 04:02:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1701835353; bh=f6TUQi8YLonQSXR1Mwy5Ic6tqKo5drSWb160rTjbLJw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=jjDu4Syql+aC4BpMWIQK9tsITUMj6q3ueujPYpxdCYjDZ0yFfvNnUSLze1H1711BE uQcFfhwd4CLE8HxM1RdD51PcgIqDDVrNaLBOKzPrbAxzjA7/Ckj9JlRLLegvDDRwSd IoxyT2wwp+QkbK3gqM8qmxpCaz8Ssn2hCzcICAorNquRopWi6TX4cjOYia4NwDT7cX ji76nJ93z2W95uu9ByVZ+jfIeeBh4tEVtJ1bTJ0+tQqgbf4HdLFcVS0VVnRw9q+tUI UUg9KaB/SDhWe8NaKL9b29fQ0ksBl5ZQVFQ/XcoLzJC+vlhne3t7Ps/m7r6LestrNI Irc8CSYO66K7g== Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2023 20:02:32 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Ioana Ciornei Cc: davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] dpaa2-switch: do not clear any interrupts automatically Message-ID: <20231205200232.410387cc@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20231204163528.1797565-6-ioana.ciornei@nxp.com> References: <20231204163528.1797565-1-ioana.ciornei@nxp.com> <20231204163528.1797565-6-ioana.ciornei@nxp.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 18:35:25 +0200 Ioana Ciornei wrote: > The dpsw_get_irq_status() can clear interrupts automatically based on > the value stored in the 'status' variable passed to it. We don't want > that to happen because we could get into a situation when we are > clearing more interrupts that we actually handled. > > Just resort to manually clearing interrupts after we received them using > the dpsw_clear_irq_status(). Currently it can't cause any issues? We won't get into an IRQ storm if some unexpected IRQ fires?