lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jan]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci: disable irq in sdhci host suspend ranther than free this irq
On Thu, 28 Jan 2016, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 28 January 2016 at 11:20, Russell King - ARM Linux
> <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >> - free_irq(host->irq, host);
> >> + disable_irq(host->irq);
> >
> > This is really not acceptable I'm afraid. While it's common on ARM for
> > each interrupt to be uniquely allocated to a peripheral, not all SDHCI
> > platforms have that luxury.
> >
> > SDHCI is also used on PCI, and on x86 platforms, it's common to have PCI
> > interrupts shared between (sometimes many) different PCI devices.
> >
> > For example, on my laptop:
> >
> > 18: 1089806 286185 IO-APIC-fasteoi uhci_hcd:usb8, r852, mmc0
> >
> > the SDHCI interrupt is shared with two other peripherals - one USB
> > controller and a NAND device.
> >
> > Disabling the interrupt will adversely impact other peripherals and
> > cause regressions where the interrupt is shared.
>
> I thought disable|enable_irq() was being reference counted, so it
> shouldn't impact the other peripherals for shared IRQs. I might have
> understood this wrong though!?

It's reference counted. But it disables the irq line and not a particular
interrupt handler.

> Although, as if that's the case it also means that the IRQ can still
> reach sdhci's irq handler as it hasn't actually been disabled.

No. The result is that the other devices on the same irq line won't get any
interrupt anymore.

> Therefore, the only way we currently can make sure to don't get the
> IRQ is to free and later re-request it. Now, apparently that has
> issues when using threaded IRQ handlers.

What's the issue?

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-01-28 18:01    [W:0.093 / U:0.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site