Hi,
>
>>>> +static irqreturn_t cdns3_device_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct cdns3_device *priv_dev;
>>>> + struct cdns3 *cdns = data;
>>>> + irqreturn_t ret = IRQ_NONE;
>>>> + unsigned long flags;
>>>> + u32 reg;
>>>> +
>>>> + priv_dev = cdns->gadget_dev;
>>>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&priv_dev->lock, flags);
>>>
>>>you're already running in hardirq context. Why do you need this lock at
>>>all? I would be better to use the hardirq handler to mask your
>>>interrupts, so they don't fire again, then used the top-half (softirq)
>>>handler to actually handle the interrupts.
>>
>> Yes, spin_lock_irqsave is not necessary here.
>>
>> Do you mean replacing devm_request_irq with a request_threaded_irq ?
>> I have single interrupt line shared between Host, Driver, DRD/OTG.
>> I'm not sure if it will work more efficiently.
>
>The whole idea for running very little in hardirq context is to give the
>scheduler a chance to decide what should run. This is important to
>reduce latency when running with RT patchset applied, for
>example. However, I'll give you that, it's a minor requirement. It's
>just that, to me, it's a small detail that's easy to implement.
I will do it in PATCH v2 or PATCH v3.
I need to post next version before 24 of December, so if I can do it
before this date then it will be in PATCH v2.
Thanks
Pawel
