Re: [PATCH -rt][RESEND] fix preempt hardirqs on OMAP

[Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 11:38:28AM -0800, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-12-11 at 20:05 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * Some boards will disable an interrupt when it
> > > +	 * sets IRQ_PENDING . So we have to remove the flag
> > > +	 * and re-enable to handle it.
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (desc->status & IRQ_PENDING) {
> > > +		desc->status &= ~IRQ_PENDING;
> > > +		if (desc->chip)
> > > +			desc->chip->enable(irq);
> > > +		goto restart;
> > > +	}
> > 
> > what if the irq got disabled meanwhile? Also, chip->enable is a 
> > compatibility method, not something we should use in a flow handler.
> 
> I don't know how other arches deal with IRQ_PENDING, but ARM (OMAP at
> least) disables the IRQ on IRQ_PENDING.

Please point out where it's doing that, and I'll take a look to see
if it's doing something it shouldn't.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
-
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/