[PATCH net-next] declance: Remove IRQF_ONESHOT

[PATCH net-next] declance: Remove IRQF_ONESHOT

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior]

Passing IRQF_ONESHOT ensures that the interrupt source is masked until
the secondary (threaded) handler is done. If only a primary handler is
used then the flag makes no sense because the interrupt can not fire
(again) while its handler is running.
The flag also disallows force-threading of the primary handler and the
irq-core will warn about this.

Remove IRQF_ONESHOT to irqflags.

Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
---

lance_dma_merr_int() does nothing but a printk() which means if it is a
level interrupt then once it fires it remains asserted and that printk()
takes over the machine.
I guess it never fires and is just left over debug.

 drivers/net/ethernet/amd/declance.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/declance.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/declance.c
index 8d05a0c5f2d5d..e6d56fcdc1ddd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/declance.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/declance.c
@@ -813,7 +813,7 @@ static int lance_open(struct net_device *dev)
 	if (lp->dma_irq >= 0) {
 		unsigned long flags;
 
-		if (request_irq(lp->dma_irq, lance_dma_merr_int, IRQF_ONESHOT,
+		if (request_irq(lp->dma_irq, lance_dma_merr_int, 0,
 				"lance error", dev)) {
 			free_irq(dev->irq, dev);
 			printk("%s: Can't get DMA IRQ %d\n", dev->name,
-- 
2.51.0

Re: [PATCH net-next] declance: Remove IRQF_ONESHOT

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Fri, 23 Jan 2026 12:06:16 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Passing IRQF_ONESHOT ensures that the interrupt source is masked until
> the secondary (threaded) handler is done. If only a primary handler is
> used then the flag makes no sense because the interrupt can not fire
> (again) while its handler is running.
> The flag also disallows force-threading of the primary handler and the
> irq-core will warn about this.
> 
> Remove IRQF_ONESHOT to irqflags.
> 
> Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>
> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
> Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> ---
> 
> lance_dma_merr_int() does nothing but a printk() which means if it is a
> level interrupt then once it fires it remains asserted and that printk()
> takes over the machine.
> I guess it never fires and is just left over debug.

have you seen 0fabe1021f8bc9cffdede4ddad0dd04d43c5166c ?
Sounds like it may have been a hack local to MIPS.
On a quick read indeed your changes seems fine but it would give us
certain warm and fuzzies to have the commit message refer to and 
reason about the patch that introduced the flag..
-- 
pw-bot: cr

Re: [PATCH net-next] declance: Remove IRQF_ONESHOT

[Sebastian Andrzej Siewior]

On 2026-01-26 19:40:54 [-0800], Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > lance_dma_merr_int() does nothing but a printk() which means if it is a
> > level interrupt then once it fires it remains asserted and that printk()
> > takes over the machine.
> > I guess it never fires and is just left over debug.
> 
> have you seen 0fabe1021f8bc9cffdede4ddad0dd04d43c5166c ?

no, I did now.

> Sounds like it may have been a hack local to MIPS.
> On a quick read indeed your changes seems fine but it would give us
> certain warm and fuzzies to have the commit message refer to and 
> reason about the patch that introduced the flag..

Will do so.

Sebastian