lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Nov]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 2.6.19-rc6: known regressions (v4)
    > I really think this is wrong.
    >
    > The original patch was wrong, and the _real_ problem is in __do_IRQ() that
    > got the desc->lock too early.
    >
    > I _think_ the correct fix is to simply revert the broken commit, and fix
    > the _one_ place that called "misnote_interrupt()" with the lock held.
    >
    > Something like this..
    >
    > I also think that the real fix will be to move the whole
    >
    > if (!noirqdebug)
    > note_interrupt(irq, desc, action_ret);
    >
    >
    > into handle_IRQ_event itself, since every caller (except for
    > "misrouted_irq()" itself, and that should probably be done separately)
    > should always do it. Right now we have a lot of people that just do
    >
    > action_ret = handle_IRQ_event(irq, action);
    > if (!noirqdebug)
    > note_interrupt(irq, desc, action_ret);
    >
    > explicitly.
    >
    > The only thing that keeps us from doing that is that we don't pass in
    > "desc", but we should just do that.
    >
    > But in the meantime, this appears to be the minimal fix. Can people please
    > test and verify?

    This works for me, but is this normal that desc's fields are
    modified non-atomically in note_interrupt()?

    And one more thing - report_bad_irq() traverses desc->action
    list without any locking either.
    -
    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: 2006-11-22 10:53    [W:0.043 / U:58.400 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site