[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701301430450.3606@nanos>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 14:32:02 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>
cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: irq domain hierarchy vs. chaining w/ PCI MSI-X...
On Fri, 13 Jan 2017, David Daney wrote:
> At the point where the handle_*_irq() functions call handle_irq_event(), we
> need to 9optionally) do something both immediately before and after the call
> to handle_irq_event().
>
> In irq_chip add a function:
>
> void (*irq_handle)(struct irq_data *data, struct irq_desc *desc);
>
> Really this is the per irq_chip flow handler.
>
> Then in handle_fasteoi_irq() and probably the other flow handlers as well:
>
> .
> .
> .
> if (chip->irq_handle)
> chip->irq_handle(&desc->irq_data, desc);
> else
> handle_irq_event(desc);
> .
> .
> .
>
> Those 4 lines of code could be factored out into a helper function in chip.c
And why don't you just write a flow handler function which does exactly
what you need instead of adding more conditionals into all hotpath
functions?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists