Re: [PATCH] genirq: Deduplicate WARN_ON_ONCE() in generic_handle_domain_irq()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2022-05-16 08:53:29 [+0200], Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > they tell you that the context is wrong.
> 
> Why? These handlers can be called from any context, really. Yes. They
> need to be called with interrupts disabled, but that's it. The warning
> is checking hard interrupt context unconditionally.

correct. If the context is wrong, the interrupts are usually not
disabled.

> > From looking at gpio-dln2 this is called from USB URB's callback which
> > is softirq. In the end dln2_gpio_event() is invoked while
> > dln2_dev::event_cb_lock is acquired.  That lock is acquired by
> > disabling interrupts which is what gets the locking right for
> > generic_handle_domain_irq(). If that lock lifted to spin_lock_bh()
> > (because it is always in urb's calback context and all HCDs complete
> > in one context unlike now) then this breaks.
> 
> Yes, but that's a different problem.
> 
> > And PREEMPT_RT is broken already. Therefore, last week, I've been
> > promoting generic_handle_domain_irq_safe()
> > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/YnkfWFzvusFFktSt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> Well, that's just a wrapper which adds the local_irq_save(), so it's not
> any different from having the local_irq_save() at the callsite, unless
> I'm missing something.

I haven't seen a local_irq_save() at the callsite. If it is, then it is
not any different.

> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx

Sebastian



[Index of Archives]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Samsung SOC]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux