[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1906281126290.1802@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 11:28:22 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Robert Hodaszi <Robert.Hodaszi@...i.com>,
Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@...lanox.com>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/5] genirq: Delay deactivation in free_irq()
Marc,
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > --- a/kernel/irq/autoprobe.c
> > +++ b/kernel/irq/autoprobe.c
> > @@ -1699,6 +1700,7 @@ static struct irqaction *__free_irq(stru
> > /* If this was the last handler, shut down the IRQ line: */
> > if (!desc->action) {
> > irq_settings_clr_disable_unlazy(desc);
> > + /* Only shutdown. Deactivate after synchronize_irq() */
>
> synchronize_hardirq()
Correct.
> >
> > irq_release_resources(desc);
> The patch makes complete sense, so this comment is only a nit, feel free
> to ignore me: I find it a bit odd that irq_shutdown() doesn't do the
> full thing anymore, given that it is the "canonical" function, and that
> __free_irq is the only one that has special needs. Suggestion below.
We have pretty much the same thing with startup, so I made it symmetric.
> Irrespective of which version you prefer:
>
> Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Thanks for looking into this!
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists