From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Albert ARIBAUD Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 09:20:04 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 0/3] arm: add interrupt support In-Reply-To: References: <1411335230-26907-1-git-send-email-savoundg@gmail.com> <20140922103459.0A0D.AA925319@jp.panasonic.com> <54206948.3090001@gmail.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Masahiro, On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:17:28 +0900, Masahiro YAMADA wrote: > Hi Georges, > > 2014-09-23 3:24 GMT+09:00 Georges Savoundararadj : > > Le 22/09/2014 03:35, Masahiro Yamada a ?crit : > >> > >> On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 23:33:47 +0200 > >> Georges Savoundararadj wrote: > >> > >>> Hi folks, > >>> > >>> I wanted to use interrupt on U-Boot on my Raspberry Pi but I have > >>> found that it did not work properly. > >>> > >>> My patches intend to make interrupt work. > >> > >> > >> I am not sure if interrupt feature is necessary for a boot loader. > > > > Of course, It is not necessary. > > > > But for U-boot, I think it is still important to handle exception correctly > > even if interrupts are not used. Don't you? > > > > For instance, without these patches an undefined instruction or any other > > exception causes an unexpected behavior. It is better to handle properly > > these cases (dump registers and reset CPU, see functions do_* in > > arch/arm/lib/interrupts.c). > > My patches should better be considered as *bugfixes*. > > > > Sorry, totally my misunderstanding. > (I thought you were trying to implement a full interrupt feature.) > > As long as they are bug fixes of exception handlers, they are fine. > > I should have read your patches more carefully before my response. > Again, my apologies.. But then, the patch series needs at east to be reworded, since it does mention interrupts where actually all exceptions are involved. Note to Georges: I am reading the patches right now and will comment on them. > Best Regards > Masahiro Yamada Amicalement, -- Albert.