--
On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> --
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
>
> > I was looking over the patches in preempt-irqs-core.patch in the broken
> > out 23rt3 series and came across this chunk:
> >
> > -----------
> > @@ -325,6 +349,11 @@ int setup_irq(unsigned int irq, struct i
> > if (!shared) {
> > irq_chip_set_defaults(desc->chip);
> >
> > + /*
> > + * Propagate any possible IRQF_NODELAY flag into IRQ_NODELAY:
> > + */
> > + recalculate_desc_flags(desc);
> > +
> > #if defined(CONFIG_IRQ_PER_CPU)
> > if (new->flags & IRQF_PERCPU)
> > desc->status |= IRQ_PER_CPU;
> > -----------
> >
> > Note the recalculate is actually contained within the "if (!shared)"
> > even though at a casual glance the indentation suggests otherwise.
> >
> > Looking at older versions of the broken out patches leads me to believe
> > the if clause should be after the recalculate. I've attached a patch to
> > do just that, but if you'd rather I just respin the preempt-irqs-core.patch
> > then I could just as easily do that as well.
> >
>
> Grumble, That's what I get for keeping fuzzy patching turned on in quilt
> :-(
>
Looking at the patch set I started with, the bug exists there too. I just
did a full -F0 rework of what I started with and didn't find anything else
that could have been caused by fuzzy logic. Seems this bug crept in before
I took over as patch monkey.
-- Steve
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
