[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1009272048100.2416@localhost6.localdomain6>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 20:49:49 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org" <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-cris-kernel@...s.com" <linux-cris-kernel@...s.com>,
"linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
Hirokazu Takata <takata@...ux-m32r.org>,
Greg Ungerer <gerg@...inux.org>, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
"linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC trollpatch 1/1] genirq: Remove the fits all and nothing
__do_IRQ() code
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > No, it's deliberate. The solution is to use the correct flow handler
> > for your device. We have currently several flow handlers implemented:
>
> Yes, I found the different "handle_*_irq()" functions. The _percpu_
> variant works fine for the ia64 per-cpu interrupt paths.
>
> But *NONE* of them call desc->chip->end() (even though the code flow
> in Documentation/DcoBook/genericirq.tmpl says that three of them do
> call it]. So it appears that this was thought to be necessary when
> the docs were written, but was not put into the code.
Yeah, sorry.
> The ia64 chip->end function for edge triggered interrupts is a nop(),
> so handle_edge_irq() ought to work just fine for it [can't confirm
> from my initial tests because the HP box I'm using only has level
> triggered ones].
>
> handle_level_irq() works for my level triggered interrupts if I add
> a "desc->chip->end(irq)" call to it.
Hmm, why isn't chip->unmask() sufficient ?
> git grep "chip->end" appears to show that the only use of chip->end
> is in the "Recovery handler for misrouted interrupts": try_one_irq()
Right, that's just due to the old __do_IRQ() compability.
> At minimum we seem to have some documentation inconsistencies with
> the code.
Will fix.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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