Re: [patch 2.6.18-rc1] genirq: {en,dis}able_irq_wake() need refcounting too

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Mon, 2006-07-10 at 10:58 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote:
> 
> > It's not just "normal" mode operation that needs refcounting for the 
> > {en,dis}able_irq() calls ... "wakeup" mode calls need it too, for the 
> > very same reasons.
> > 
> > This patch adds that refcounting.  I expect that some ARM drivers will 
> > be triggering the new warning, but this call isn't yet widely used. 
> > (Which is probably why the bug has lingered this long...)
> 
> Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

  Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

> we should also add disable_irq_wake() / enable_irq_wake() APIs and start 
> migrating most ARM users over to the new APIs, agreed? That makes the 
> APIs more symmetric and the code more readable too.

see linux/interrupt.h:

/* IRQ wakeup (PM) control: */
extern int set_irq_wake(unsigned int  irq, unsigned int on);

static inline int enable_irq_wake(unsigned int irq)
{
        return set_irq_wake(irq, 1);
}

static inline int disable_irq_wake(unsigned int irq)
{
        return set_irq_wake(irq, 0);
}

It's already there and ARM uses those functions :)

	tglx


-
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/