[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTimA8ZP4WL8u0Uvtt-0MWXPkGfjwQ7437pL-h0D-@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 11:57:23 +0530
From: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
To: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Chao Xie <chao.xie@...vell.com>,
Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] GIC: Assign correct flow handler type in set_type callback
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Abhijeet Dharmapurikar
<adharmap@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> There are some interrupts that are true edge triggered in nature. If not
> marked IRQ_PENDING, when disabled, they will be lost.
>
> Use the set_type callback to assign the correct flow type handler for
> shared peripheral interrupts.
>
> Signed-off-by: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> This came to light when a edge triggered interrupt was supposed to wakeup the
> sytem. The flow handler was set to the default handle_level_irq. On the resume
> path the flow handler was invoked right after the I bit was cleared but before
> each individual interrupts were enabled. This made the handle_level_irq ignore
Why does the flow handler hit when the interrupt is disabled? Have you set
IRQF_NOSUSPEND on this interrupt?
> the interrupt (mask_ack it) and it was lost. handle_edge_irq does the right
> thing by marking the interrupt as IRQ_PENDING and when the resume code gets to
> enabling each interrupt this interrupt is resent again.
--
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