Re: [PATCH] Use delayed disable mode of ioapic edge triggeredinterrupts
From: Linus Torvalds
Date: Tue Nov 14 2006 - 20:21:58 EST
On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Hopefully this is the trivial patch that solves the problem.
Ok, having looked more at this, I have to say that the whole
"IRQ_DELAYED_DISABLE" thing seems very fragile indeed.
It looks like we should do it not only for APIC edge-triggered interrupts,
but for HT and MSI interrupts too, as far as I can tell (at least they
also use the "handle_edge_irq" routine)
So I'm wondering how many other cases there are that are missing this.
In that sense, Ingo's patch was a lot safer, although I still dislike it
for all the other reasons I mentioned - it's simply wrong to re-send a
level-triggered irq.
I don't know MSI and HT interrupts well enough to tell whether they will
re-trigger on their own when we unmask them, but the point is, this
_looks_ like it might be incomplete.
I think part of the problem is a bad interface. We should simply never set
the IRQ handler on its own. It should be a field in the "irq_chip"
structure, and we should use _different_ irq chip structures for level and
edge-triggered. Then we should also add the "flags" thing there, and you
could do something like
static struct irq_chip level_ioapic_chip = {
..
instead of making the insane decision to use the "same" chip for all
ioapic things.
Ingo? Eric? Comments?
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/