Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] Provide and use generic_handle_irq_safe() where appropriate.

[Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:

> handler/ interrupt controller entry). It is low level code and the
> function expects that interrupts are disabled at entry point.
> 
> This isn't the case for invocations from tasklets, workqueues or the
> primary interrupt handler on PREEMPT_RT. Once this gets noticed a
> "local_irq_disable|safe()" is added. To avoid further confusion this
> series adds generic_handle_irq_safe() which can be used from any context
> and adds a few user.
> 
> v2…v4:
>   - Correct kernel doc for generic_handle_irq_safe() as per Wolfram Sang.
>   - Use "misc" instead of "mfd" for the hi6421-spmi-pmic driver.
> 
> v2…v1:
>  https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220131123404.175438-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de/
>  - Redo kernel-doc for generic_handle_irq_safe() in #1.
>  - Use generic_handle_irq_safe() instead of generic_handle_irq() in the
>    patch description where I accidently used the wrong one.
> v1:
>  https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220127113303.3012207-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de/

Please use the official cover-letter format (--cover-letter).

It would have been nice to at least find a diff stat here.

...

Do we really need to coordinate this series cross-subsystem?

Can we first apply the API, then have each of the subsystems adapted
separately?  Does the change-over all need to happen concurrently?

If the latter is the case, is this set bisectable?

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Principal Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog