Re: [PATCH 2.6.13] libata: use common pci remove in ahci

[Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>]

Brett Russ wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Brett Russ wrote:
> > > 2) Isn't it wrong for the IRQ disable at the chip to occur *after*
> > > free_irq() is called to disconnect the handler (independent of
> > > question 1...since this is the case currently)?  Granted, all of the
> > > ports have gone through scsi_remove_host() but theoretically there
> > > still is a possibility the chip could interrupt.
Answer:  depends on hardware.

For all hardware, the conditions that generate interrupts should be shut 
down, and then free_irq() is called after that.
Some hardware only needs per-port disable, or nothing besides clearing 
any commands, to ensure that interrupts from that hardware are disabled 
(this excludes shared interrupts, of course).
This logic is another reason why a driver author may choose to implement 
their own PCI ->remove() hook, rather than using the generic 
ata_pci_remove_one().  Eliminates the need for a ->host_stop() hook 
implementation, and allows one to perform tasks before calling 
free_irq(), as well as tasks after the call (normal ->host_stop stuff).
	Jeff



-
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/