[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fa686aa40710020657j1c97a23ejdd3322f5cba3bbb5@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 07:57:17 -0600
From: "Grant Likely" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To: benh@...nel.crashing.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
paulus@...ba.org, axboe@...nel.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] Sysace: Move IRQ handler registration to occur after FSM is initialized
On 10/1/07, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 2007-09-30 at 16:57 -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> > val |= ACE_CTRL_DATABUFRDYIRQ | ACE_CTRL_ERRORIRQ;
> > ace_out(ace, ACE_CTRL, val);
> >
> > + /* Now we can hook up the irq handler */
> > + if (ace->irq != NO_IRQ) {
> > + rc = request_irq(ace->irq, ace_interrupt, 0,
> > "systemace", ace);
> > + if (rc) {
> > + /* Failure - fall back to polled mode */
> > + dev_err(ace->dev, "request_irq failed\n");
> > + ace->irq = NO_IRQ;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
>
> I don't know the HW but from the above, it looks like you enable
> interrupt emission on the HW before you register the handler, which is
> wrong. You should make sure on the contrary that IRQs on the HW are
> disabled until after you have registered a handler.
>
> Only really a problem if you have shared interrupts but still...
Yeah, you're right. Fortunately all current in-tree platforms which
use this do not have shared interrupts, but I'd like to be correct on
this.
I'll tidy this up and send a fixup patch.
Thanks,
g.
--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
grant.likely@...retlab.ca
(403) 399-0195
-
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