Re: [Linuxarm] [PATCH for next v1 0/2] gpio: few clean up patches to replace spin_lock_irqsave with spin_lock

[luojiaxing]

On 2021/2/8 21:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:11 AM luojiaxing <luojiaxing@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Sorry, my operation error causes a patch missing from this patch set. I
> > re-send the patch set. Please check the new one.
> What is the new one?! You have to give proper versioning and change
> log for your series.


sure, I will send a new one later, but let me answer your question first.


> > On 2021/2/8 16:56, Luo Jiaxing wrote:
> > > There is no need to use API with _irqsave in hard IRQ handler, So replace
> > > those with spin_lock.
> How do you know that another CPU in the system can't serve the
> following interrupt from the hardware at the same time?


Yes, I have some question before.


There are some similar discussion here,  please take a look, Song baohua 
explained it more professionally.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e949a474a9284ac6951813bfc8b34945@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/


Here are some excerpts from the discussion:


I think the code disabling irq in hardIRQ is simply wrong.
Since this commit
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e58aa3d2d0cc
genirq: Run irq handlers with interrupts disabled

interrupt handlers are definitely running in a irq-disabled context
unless irq handlers enable them explicitly in the handler to permit
other interrupts.


Thanks

Jiaxing


>