[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090408193656.GI7556@lenovo>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 2009 23:36:56 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH -tip] x86: do_IRQ - send EOI for x86-32 on irq without
handler v3
For X86-32 if IRQ has no handler it remains non-Ack'ed
even if APIC is not requested for being disabled.
Since disable_apic depends on CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC rather
then CONFIG_X86_64 we could bring tiny fix here.
Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
---
arch/x86/kernel/irq.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Ingo it's an interim fix.
I didn't manage yet to implement what you proposed
(marked http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/4/8/549).
Index: linux-2.6.git/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
=====================================================================
--- linux-2.6.git.orig/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
+++ linux-2.6.git/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
@@ -223,10 +223,16 @@ unsigned int __irq_entry do_IRQ(struct p
irq = __get_cpu_var(vector_irq)[vector];
if (!handle_irq(irq, regs)) {
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
+ /*
+ * FIXME: Actually we could go further and replace
+ * ack_APIC_irq->apic_write->apic->write with a NOP
+ * operation as only disable_apic is set and happily call
+ * ack_APIC_irq after that without any tests
+ */
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
if (!disable_apic)
- ack_APIC_irq();
#endif
+ ack_APIC_irq();
if (printk_ratelimit())
printk(KERN_EMERG "%s: %d.%d No irq handler for vector (irq %d)\n",
--
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