[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1377141057.25016.265.camel@pasglop>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 13:10:57 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: fweisbec@...il.com, paul.gortmaker@...driver.com, paulus@...ba.org,
shangw@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, galak@...nel.crashing.org,
deepthi@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
arnd@...db.de, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
rjw@...k.pl, john.stultz@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
chenhui.zhao@...escale.com, michael@...erman.id.au,
r58472@...escale.com, geoff@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC V2 PATCH 2/6] powerpc: Implement broadcast timer interrupt
as an IPI message
On Wed, 2013-08-14 at 17:26 +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> -static irqreturn_t unused_action(int irq, void *data)
> +static irqreturn_t timer_action(int irq, void *data)
> {
> - /* This slot is unused and hence available for use, if needed
> */
> + timer_interrupt();
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
That means we'll do irq_enter/irq_exit twice no ? And things like
may_hard_irq_enable() are also already done by do_IRQ so you
don't need timer_interrupt() to do it again.
We probably are better off breaking timer_interrupt in two:
void __timer_interrupt(struct pt_regs * regs)
Does the current stuff between irq_enter and irq_exit, timer_interrupt
does the remaining around it and calls __timer_interrupt.
Then from timer_action, you call __timer_interrupt()
Cheers,
Ben.
--
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