[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1508021100390.3825@nanos>
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2015 11:10:21 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
cc: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
LAK <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Dueck <davidcdueck@...glemail.com>,
Sebastian Sewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] clocksource: atmel-st: Remove irq handler when clock
event is unused
On Mon, 20 Jul 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
>
> > On 20/07/2015 at 11:04:30 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote :
> > > That's why I used setup/remove_irq() in the stale RT changes.
> > >
> >
> > Hum, actually, you hit the same thing with setup/remove_irq (and I'm not sure
> > to follow why):
>
> It's the kmalloc of the proc interface. So back to the drawing
> board. I'll think about it tomorrow with brain awake.
So the only idea I could come up with is the old approach of creating
a dummy irq chip for the interrupts which share that timer/uart/rtc
whatever line.
I think Boris Brezillon had implemented it at some point, but it was
shot down for reasons I can't remember. That would allow us to simply
have disable_irq_nosync/enable_irq in the relevant code pathes and be
done with it. I guess I need to find the references and give it a try
again if nobody beats me to it.
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