lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Oct]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [BUG somewhere] 2.6.0-test8 irq.c, IRQ_INPROGRESS ?

    On Thu, 23 Oct 2003, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
    >
    > It seems 2.4.23-pre8 included something like this apparently broken
    > change (see diff from -pre7 below). Should it be reverted?

    No, that one is correct. IRQ_INPROGRESS should indeed be cleared when the
    first handler is installed. It's only clearing it at enable_irq() that is
    wrong.

    Also, the "disable_irq()" function _should_ look something like this:

    void disable_irq(unsigned int irq)
    {
    irq_desc_t *desc = irq_desc + irq;
    disable_irq_nosync(irq);
    if (desc->action)
    synchronize_irq(irq);
    }

    ie it should only do synchronize_irq() if a handler exists. That fixes a
    potential problem with drivers doing multiple disable_irq()/enable_irq()
    while no handler has been assigned yet.

    Linus

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:4.166 / U:0.472 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site