[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200903021529.07894.david-b@pacbell.net>
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 15:29:07 -0800
From: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, me@...ipebalbi.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
felipe.balbi@...ia.com, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
sameo@...nedhand.com
Subject: Re: lockdep and threaded IRQs (was: ...)
On Monday 02 March 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > But if that's what is keeping you from fixing the lockdep bug,
> > why haven't you submitted patches to remove IRQF_DISABLED from
> > the kernel, and update all the drivers relying on IRQs being
> > enabled when their handlers run?
>
> I did so today. Just didn't realize things actually relied on it since
> lockdep turned them off and my system has been working fine.
That patch did no such thing. It added a BUG_ON(),
which has nothing to do with removing IRQF_DISABLED.
> Your driver needs threaded interrupts, Thomas is working on that now,
> and I saw a conversion of your driver to use that.
Thomas hasn't yet touched the issue of how to chain such IRQs
though ... I consider his v2 patches a decent start, with some
limitations that could be attributed to an x86 focus.
> IDE PIO can hopefully also be converted to threaded interrupts.
I have worked with ARMs with IDE support. That's become
rare in new chips though, even for CF cards; it needs too
many signal wires.
- Dave
--
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