[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130418200613.GB17148@8bytes.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 22:06:13 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@....com>
Cc: iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 V2] iommu/amd: Add workaround for ERBT1312
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 01:56:42PM -0500, Suthikulpanit, Suravee wrote:
> On 4/18/2013 1:35 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> According to the "kernel/irq/handle.c:irq_wake_thread()", I thought
> that for the threaded IRQ, if the system getting a new interrupt
> from the device while the thread is running, it will just return and
> do nothing.
Yes, but the irq-thread function itself executes the handler function
repeatedly until the IRQTF_RUNTHREAD bit is cleared. And every new
interrupt will set this bit again. So when there is a new interrupt
while our handler function runs the handler will be called again by the
irq-thread.
Joerg
--
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