lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [Linuxarm] [PATCH for next v1 0/2] gpio: few clean up patches to replace spin_lock_irqsave with spin_lock
From
Date

On 2021/2/8 21:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:11 AM luojiaxing <luojiaxing@huawei.com> wrote:
>> Sorry, my operation error causes a patch missing from this patch set. I
>> re-send the patch set. Please check the new one.
> What is the new one?! You have to give proper versioning and change
> log for your series.


sure, I will send a new one later, but let me answer your question first.


>
>> On 2021/2/8 16:56, Luo Jiaxing wrote:
>>> There is no need to use API with _irqsave in hard IRQ handler, So replace
>>> those with spin_lock.
> How do you know that another CPU in the system can't serve the
> following interrupt from the hardware at the same time?


Yes, I have some question before.


There are some similar discussion here,  please take a look, Song baohua
explained it more professionally.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e949a474a9284ac6951813bfc8b34945@hisilicon.com/


Here are some excerpts from the discussion:


I think the code disabling irq in hardIRQ is simply wrong.
Since this commit
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e58aa3d2d0cc
genirq: Run irq handlers with interrupts disabled

interrupt handlers are definitely running in a irq-disabled context
unless irq handlers enable them explicitly in the handler to permit
other interrupts.


Thanks

Jiaxing


>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-02-09 10:33    [W:0.054 / U:0.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site