>
> On 09/02/17 12:01, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
> >> On 06/02/17 07:03, Bharat Kumar Gogada wrote:
> >>> +static struct irq_chip nwl_leg_irq_chip = {
> >>> + .name = "nwl_pcie:legacy",
> >>> + .irq_enable = nwl_unmask_leg_irq,
> >>> + .irq_disable = nwl_mask_leg_irq,
> >>
> >> You don't need these two if they are implemented in terms of mask/unmask.
> >
> > These are being invoked by some drivers other than interrupt flow.
> > Ex: drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath9k/main.c
> > static int ath_reset_internal(struct ath_softc *sc, struct
> > ath9k_channel *hchan) {
> > ....
> > disable_irq(sc->irq);
> > tasklet_disable(&sc->intr_tq);
> > ...
> > ...
> > enable_irq(sc->irq);
> > spin_unlock_bh(&sc->sc_pcu_lock); } For us masking/unmasking
> > is the way to enable/disable interrupts.
>
> And if you looked at the way disable_irq is implemented, you would have found
> out that it falls back to masking if there is no disable method, preserving the
> semantic you expect.
>
Yes I did see, but this fall back requires extra "IRQ_DISABLE_UNLAZY" flag to be set to each virq.
Bharat
