[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220131123404.175438-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2022 13:33:57 +0100
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: greybus-dev@...ts.linaro.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alex Elder <elder@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Rui Miguel Silva <rmfrfs@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>,
Woojung Huh <woojung.huh@...rochip.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/7] Provide and use generic_handle_irq_safe() where appropriate.
generic_handle_irq() must be used from primary IRQ-handler (chain
handler/ interrupt controller entry). It is low level code and the
function expects that interrupts are disabled at entry point.
This isn't the case for invocations from tasklets, workqueues or the
primary interrupt handler on PREEMPT_RT. Once this gets noticed a
"local_irq_disable|safe()" is added. To avoid further confusion this
series adds generic_handle_irq_safe() which can be used from any context
and adds a few user.
v2…v1:
- Redo kernel-doc for generic_handle_irq_safe() in #1.
- Use generic_handle_irq_safe() instead of generic_handle_irq() in the
patch description where I accidently used the wrong one.
v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220127113303.3012207-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de/
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists