On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 03:38:38PM -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > On 18-03-2013 15:16, Dan Carpenter wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:59:10AM -0400, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > >>Even if the IRQ is not firing because it is ONE_SHOT and disable > >>at INTC level, the IRQ handler must use spin_lock_irqsave. > >>It is necessary to disable IRQs from the current > >>CPU while it is holding a spin_lock which is need. > >> > > > >Gar... I think I was just totally wrong on this. I think your > >original code was fine. Sorry Eduardo and Greg. > > > >This is a threaded IRQ so the regular spin_lock is fine or even the > >mutex would have been. > > In fact it is. But I rather prefer to use spinlocks there, just to > keep the irq handler sane, even if it is moved to non-threaded IRQ. Yep. I'd agree there. > > > > >IRQ_ONESHOT is about triggering a second IRQ before the first one > >has been finished, btw. > > It is, and that gets done by masking the IRQ at INTC level. > > > > >I am an idiot. > > > Not really. Thanks for your time reviewing the driver. > > I will resend this series. Drop this one and split patch 4/8 into > two I think (one for moving files, one for renaming functions) Great. Much appreciated. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
