On 09/05/2011 03:23 AM, SAURABH MALPANI wrote:
Hi,
<Re sending this because last time I am afraid I didn't hit the
correct mail filters.>
Query:
mailbox_interrupt is not registered with IRQF_PERCPU but it is
supposed to be percpu interrupt. Is that on purpose or a miss?
On Octeon the per-cpuness of a particular irq is a property of the irq
itself rather than being controlled by IRQF_PERCPU. So other than being
perhaps stylistically in poor taste, no harm is done by omitting
IRQF_PERCPU here.
I am
porting some code from x86 to octeon which requires special handling
for per cpu interrupts.
void octeon_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus)
{
cvmx_write_csr(CVMX_CIU_MBOX_CLRX(cvmx_get_core_num()), 0xffffffff);
if (request_irq(OCTEON_IRQ_MBOX0, mailbox_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
"mailbox0", mailbox_interrupt)) {
panic("Cannot request_irq(OCTEON_IRQ_MBOX0)\n");
}
if (request_irq(OCTEON_IRQ_MBOX1, mailbox_interrupt, IRQF_DISABLED,
"mailbox1", mailbox_interrupt)) {
panic("Cannot request_irq(OCTEON_IRQ_MBOX1)\n");
}
}
--
Saurabh
