Re: [PATCH PREEMPT_RT]: On AT91 ARM: GPIO Interrupt handling can/willstall forever

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 12:27:30PM +0100, Remy Bohmer wrote:
>
> Ah, and looking at the changes to the file, the addition of the mask
> and unmask was done by someone who didn't understand what this was
> trying to do.  So that change should be backed out.
>

Perhaps only part of the change should be backed out.  The part that masks
the irq in the handle_simple_irq code.

That's from commit 76d2160147f43f982dfe881404cfde9fd0a9da21 which is to
not disable an irq line when disable_irq is called.  A form of lazy
disable irq.

This speeds up code that uses disable_irq, since the line is only masked
when an interrupt actually arrives. Using disable_irq / enable_irq does no
IRQ chip modifications if an interrupt from the IRQ line does not arrive
between the two.

Now the question is, can something that uses handle_simple_irq call
disable_irq?  If there is no mask function, I would assume that this would
be a noop in such a case. If this is true, then we could remove the mask
from handle_simple_irq. But then we might want to add a BUG() in
disable_irq for simple_irqs.

-- Steve

-
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/