From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <stable-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:55112 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1751245AbeBTVtb (ORCPT <rfc822;stable@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 20 Feb 2018 16:49:31 -0500
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 21:49:26 +0000
From: James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>
To: Huacai Chen <chenhc@lemote.com>
Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>,
        "Steven J . Hill" <Steven.Hill@cavium.com>,
        linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Fuxin Zhang <zhangfx@lemote.com>,
        Zhangjin Wu <wuzhangjin@gmail.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 11/12] MIPS: Loongson-3: Fix CPU UART irq delivery
 problem
Message-ID: <20180220214925.GF6245@saruman>
References: <1517022752-3053-1-git-send-email-chenhc@lemote.com>
 <1517023381-17624-1-git-send-email-chenhc@lemote.com>
 <1517023381-17624-2-git-send-email-chenhc@lemote.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1517023381-17624-2-git-send-email-chenhc@lemote.com>
Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <stable.vger.kernel.org>


--vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 11:23:00AM +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> Masking/unmasking the CPU UART irq in CP0_Status (and redirecting it to
> other CPUs) may cause interrupts be lost, especially in multi-package
> machines (Package-0's UART irq cannot be delivered to others). So make
> mask_loongson_irq() and unmask_loongson_irq() be no-ops.
>=20
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

=2E..

> -static inline void mask_loongson_irq(struct irq_data *d)
> -{
> -	clear_c0_status(0x100 << (d->irq - MIPS_CPU_IRQ_BASE));
> -	irq_disable_hazard();
> -
> -	/* Workaround: UART IRQ may deliver to any core */

Wouldn't removing this self-described "workaround" bring back the
original problem?

At the very least you need a much better explanation of why these
workarounds are no longer applicable and can be safely removed.

Cheers
James

--vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=oZtf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--vA66WO2vHvL/CRSR--