Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:43:29 +0000 | From | Russell King - ARM Linux <> | Subject | Re: Get rid of IRQF_DISABLED - (was [PATCH] genirq: warn about IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED) |
| |
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 03:32:23PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:01:00 +0000 > Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 02:47:02PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > > SHARED|DISABLED ought to WARN_ON() and if that doesn't motivate people > > > then return -EINVAL. > > > > That is an impossibility. There is hardware out there (AT91) where > > the timer interrupt is shared with other peripherals, and you end > > up with a mixture of irqs-disabled and irqs-enabled handlers sharing > > the same interrupt. > > Well that will encourage people to fix it. > > > My point is that if we outlaw irqs-disabled shared interrupts, it puts > > Atmel AT91 support into immediate difficulties. > > If a driver disables the timer irq across a tick aren't you already in > trouble ?
Not with this clockevents code - you can miss timer interrupts and the core time keeping code catches up automatically.
| |