[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090920180632.GB8498@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 20:06:32 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Don't ack_APIC_irq() if lapic is disabled in
GENERIC_INTERRUPT_VECTOR handler
* Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> Otherwise would cause trouble...
>
> Cc: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang <sheng@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/irq.c | 3 ++-
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> index b0cdde6..78b23d0 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -257,7 +257,8 @@ void smp_generic_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> struct pt_regs *old_regs = set_irq_regs(regs);
>
> - ack_APIC_irq();
> + if (!disable_apic)
> + ack_APIC_irq();
Wont in that case the apic->ack method be a NOP?
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