On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:18:39PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote: > This feels odd. It means that you cannot have the following sequence: > > local_irq_disable(); > enable_irq(x); // where x is owned by a remote hart > > as smp_call_function_single() requires interrupts to be enabled. > > More fundamentally, why are you trying to make these interrupts look > global while they aren't? arm/arm64 have similar restrictions with GICv2 > and earlier, and treats these interrupts as per-cpu. > > Given that the drivers that deal with drivers connected to the per-hart > irqchip are themselves likely to be aware of the per-cpu aspect, it > would make sense to align things (we've been through that same > discussion about the clocksource driver a few weeks back). Right now the only direct consumers are said clocksource, the PLIC driver later in this series and the RISC-V arch IPI code. None of them is going to do a manual enable_irq, so I guess the remote case of the code is simply dead code. I'll take a look at converting them to per-cpu. I guess the GICv2 driver is the best template? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
