[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070624005140.GC25516@linux-os.sc.intel.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2007 17:51:40 -0700
From: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...e.de
Subject: Re: Device hang when offlining a CPU due to IRQ misrouting
On Sat, Jun 23, 2007 at 06:45:05PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Hmm. It looks like Siddha sent the wrong version of the patch.
> The working tested version had an additional test to ensure
> the mask and unmask methods were implemented.
>
> i.e.
> + if (irq_desc[irq].chip->mask)
> + irq_desc[irq].chip->mask(irq);
> and
>
> + if (irq_desc[irq].chip->unmask)
> + irq_desc[irq].chip->unmask(irq);
> +
>
> Siddha think you can resend the correct version.
Eric, In this version, I added the irq_has_action() check and hence
removed the check which ensures the presence for mask/unmask. My tests
showed that it was working fine. May be I am missing something.
>
> Rafael. Think you can add those two ifs and see if you test bed box
> works?
>
> I'm still not convinced that we can make fixup_irqs work in general
> but if we aren't going to yank it we should at least make it
> consistent with the rest of the code.
I agree.
thanks,
suresh
-
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