Â
On Fri, 11 Mar 2011 23:40:32 0100, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
Hi Marcel.
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:26:36PM 0100, Marcel van Nies wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Regarding the segfault - the easiest way forward would be to split the
> > > patch up in smaller chunks so we know which part causes the
segfault to happen.
> > >
> > > I assume you had to hand-apply the revert. If you could post
the exact patch
> > > you used for revert I will try to split it up in smaller logical parts.
> >
> > I attached the patch which I used to revert commit
> > 4d14a459857bd151ecbd14bcd37b4628da00792b
> >
> > I did a split of this patch, and build kernels with only the memcpy or
> > only the memset part reverted.
>
> Thanks for all your effort!
> I will during the weekend try to think how we can nail this,
> but I'm a bit lost here as we are looking into areas I know little about.
>
Â
Hi,
Â
I have begun too look at the patches, one thing that strikes me is
why handle_level_irq is used and why the ack functions irq_ack and
irq_mask_ack are not defined. On the LEON architecture IRQs are
normally edge triggered, the exception beeing PCI interrupts that is
level triggered. Implementing the ack functions in the current
implementation would result in acking edge triggered IRQs which means
IRQs may be lost (on the LEON at least)? I thought SUN SPARCs also have
edge triggered interrupts and that the CPU acks the IRQ automatically
when the trap is taken?
Â
What is the difference between having handle_level_irq without ACKs
implemented and having handle_edge_irq doing the interrupt flow
handling?
Â
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
