[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c164ff57-69f2-8a5f-43f4-ec170bd99c22@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 11:53:17 +0100
From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>, Paul Durrant <paul@....org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] xen/netback: fix spurious event detection for
common event case
On 11.02.2021 11:16, Juergen Gross wrote:
> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c
> @@ -162,13 +162,15 @@ irqreturn_t xenvif_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
> {
> struct xenvif_queue *queue = dev_id;
> int old;
> + bool has_rx, has_tx;
>
> old = atomic_fetch_or(NETBK_COMMON_EOI, &queue->eoi_pending);
> WARN(old, "Interrupt while EOI pending\n");
>
> - /* Use bitwise or as we need to call both functions. */
> - if ((!xenvif_handle_tx_interrupt(queue) |
> - !xenvif_handle_rx_interrupt(queue))) {
> + has_tx = xenvif_handle_tx_interrupt(queue);
> + has_rx = xenvif_handle_rx_interrupt(queue);
> +
> + if (!has_rx && !has_tx) {
> atomic_andnot(NETBK_COMMON_EOI, &queue->eoi_pending);
> xen_irq_lateeoi(irq, XEN_EOI_FLAG_SPURIOUS);
> }
>
Ah yes, what was originally meant really was
if (!(xenvif_handle_tx_interrupt(queue) |
xenvif_handle_rx_interrupt(queue))) {
(also hinted at by the otherwise pointless inner parentheses),
which you simply write in an alternative way.
Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
Jan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists