Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Wed, 22 Nov 2006 12:44:14 +0300 | From | Pavel Emelianov <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.19-rc6: known regressions (v4) |
| |
> I really think this is wrong. > > The original patch was wrong, and the _real_ problem is in __do_IRQ() that > got the desc->lock too early. > > I _think_ the correct fix is to simply revert the broken commit, and fix > the _one_ place that called "misnote_interrupt()" with the lock held. > > Something like this.. > > I also think that the real fix will be to move the whole > > if (!noirqdebug) > note_interrupt(irq, desc, action_ret); > > > into handle_IRQ_event itself, since every caller (except for > "misrouted_irq()" itself, and that should probably be done separately) > should always do it. Right now we have a lot of people that just do > > action_ret = handle_IRQ_event(irq, action); > if (!noirqdebug) > note_interrupt(irq, desc, action_ret); > > explicitly. > > The only thing that keeps us from doing that is that we don't pass in > "desc", but we should just do that. > > But in the meantime, this appears to be the minimal fix. Can people please > test and verify?
This works for me, but is this normal that desc's fields are modified non-atomically in note_interrupt()?
And one more thing - report_bad_irq() traverses desc->action list without any locking either. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |