[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] 2.6.18-rt7: PowerPC: fix breakage in threaded fasteoi type IRQ handlers

Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:

>> I must not that this whole ack() vs eoi() stuff is misleading. For example,
>>in 8259 driver, mask_ack() method actually sends EOI to PIC, not ACK's an IRQ
>>-- the actual ACK is implicit on x86 and is used to read the interrupt vector
>>form 8259 on PPC. So, IMO, there probably should only have been either ack()
>>or eoi() method in the first place. Though I'm not familiar with ARM from
>>which genirq stuff originated...

> They are different concepts. Ack clears the event on the PIC, it's
> tyically necessary for resetting the edge detection logic for edge
> interrupts and has to happen before the handler is called.

I know 8259. :-)
It also resets the corresponding IRQ bit in IRR, and sets it in ISR where
it's then cleared on EOI command.

> On MPIC or XICS, this is implicit by reading the vector. On some more
> dumb controllers, this has to be done explicitely.

This is not implicit -- CPU has to read INTACK reg. on OpenPIC. Really
implicit method is in action on x86 where CPU issues dual ACK bus cycle to get
the vector form 8259...

> EOI is a more "high level" thing that some "intelligent" PICs that
> automatically raise the priority do to restore the priority to what it
> was before the interrupt occured.

Thank you, I know. Even 8259 has the notion of priority and EOI works the
same way here.

> Ben.

WBR, Sergei
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-11-19 21:41    [W:0.114 / U:3.140 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site