[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOh2x=ntfuZ46nGVAGgEeYNPQwV677sT2Bks7Ve02LZqthHpQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2011 22:33:05 -0700
From: viresh kumar <viresh.linux@...il.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...com>, vinod.koul@...el.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux@....linux.org.uk,
armando.visconti@...com, shiraz.hashim@...com, vipin.kumar@...com,
rajeev-dlh.kumar@...com, deepak.sikri@...com,
vipulkumar.samar@...com, amit.virdi@...com, pratyush.anand@...com,
bhupesh.sharma@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/18] dmaengine/amba-pl08x: Schedule tasklet in case of
error interrupt
On 7/30/11, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> 2011/7/29 Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...com>:
> NAK.
>
> These snippets illustrate what is not good about this patch, you're making
> the driver fragile by removing checks for spurious IRQ.
>
> So for example if there is an error or TC IRQ on a channel that is not
> in use, what happens now?
>
> It used to result in IRQ_NONE, now all of a sudden we start handling
> spurious IRQs and claim IRQ_HANDLED with totally unpredictable
> results, whereas they would previously gather error metrics for
> spurious IRQs.
>
I got your point. Will resend this patch with better handling for
spurious interrupts.
--
viresh
--
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