RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge interrupt IRQS_ONESHOT support withirq thread

[anish kumar]

On Fri, 2012-10-12 at 14:57 +0000, Liu, Chuansheng wrote:
> > On SMP an interrupt which is raised after the ack() again before the
> > handler finishes, can invoke another delivery on a different CPU,
> > which then sees the IRQ_INPROGESS flag, masks it and flags it
> > PENDING. When the primary handler on the first CPU returns, it sees
> > the PENDING flag, unmasks and invokes the handler another time.
> In this case, when IRQ_INPROGRESS flag is set, on another CPU, it will
> mask and ack it, if before the primary handler on the first CPU returns,
> the edge interrupt is raised again, it will be lost, right?
Why will the interrupt be raised again?Is not it masked?I read tglx
statement as this:if the interrupt is being handled on one core, then
the delivery of new interrupt can be on the second core and in that case
it will see IRQ_INPROGRESS flag and it will *mask* it and set the flag
as pending.So there is no chance of any new interrupt.
> So I think set PENDING just confirm one time, it just depends on primary handler
> execution time and irq frequency.
> --
> 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/


--
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/