[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <704e7f37-2b94-7e1f-c42f-374254bc791c@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 22:41:04 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To: Brad Mouring <brad.mouring@...com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: phy: Move interrupt check from phy_check to
phy_interrupt
Hello!
On 03/08/2018 01:50 AM, Brad Mouring wrote:
> If multiple phys share the same interrupt (e.g. a multi-phy chip),
> the first device registered is the only one checked as phy_interrupt
> will always return IRQ_HANDLED if the first phydev is not halted.
> Move the interrupt check into phy_interrupt and, if it was not this
> phydev, return IRQ_NONE to allow other devices on this irq a chance
> to check if it was their interrupt.
Hm, looking at kernel/irq/handle.c, all registered IRQ handlers are always
called regardless of their results. Care to explain?
> Signed-off-by: Brad Mouring <brad.mouring@...com>
> ---
> drivers/net/phy/phy.c | 16 ++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> index e3e29c2b028b..ff1aa815568f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy.c
> @@ -632,6 +632,12 @@ static irqreturn_t phy_interrupt(int irq, void *phy_dat)
> if (PHY_HALTED == phydev->state)
> return IRQ_NONE; /* It can't be ours. */
>
> + if (phy_interrupt_is_valid(phydev)) {
Always true in this context, no?
> + if (phydev->drv->did_interrupt &&
> + !phydev->drv->did_interrupt(phydev))
I don't think we can do this in the interrupt context as this function *will*
read from MDIO... I think that was the reason why IRQ handling is done in the
thread context...
> + return IRQ_NONE;
> + }
> +
> phy_change(phydev);
>
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
[...]
MBR, Sergei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists