Messages in this thread | | | From | Måns Rullgård <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback | Date | Tue, 25 Jul 2017 14:29:20 +0100 |
| |
Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com> writes:
> On 25/07/2017 15:16, Måns Rullgård wrote: > >> What happened to the patch adding the proper combined function? > > It appears you're not CCed on v2. > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9859799/ > > Doug wrote: >> Yes, you understand correctly. The irq_mask_ack method is entirely >> optional and I assume that is why this issue went undetected for so >> long; however, it is slightly more efficient to combine the functions >> (even if the ack is unnecessary) which is why I chose to do so for my >> changes to the irqchip-brcmstb-l2 driver where I first discovered this >> issue. How much value the improved efficiency has is certainly >> debatable, but interrupt handling is one area where people might care >> about such a small difference. As the irqchip-tango driver maintainer >> you are welcome to decide whether or not the irq_mask_ack method makes >> sense to you. > > My preference goes to leaving the irq_mask_ack callback undefined, > and let the irqchip framework use irq_mask and irq_ack instead.
Why would you prefer the less efficient way?
-- Måns Rullgård
| |