[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061211190554.GA26392@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 20:05:54 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -rt][RESEND] fix preempt hardirqs on OMAP
* Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com> wrote:
> + /*
> + * Some boards will disable an interrupt when it
> + * sets IRQ_PENDING . So we have to remove the flag
> + * and re-enable to handle it.
> + */
> + if (desc->status & IRQ_PENDING) {
> + desc->status &= ~IRQ_PENDING;
> + if (desc->chip)
> + desc->chip->enable(irq);
> + goto restart;
> + }
what if the irq got disabled meanwhile? Also, chip->enable is a
compatibility method, not something we should use in a flow handler.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists