Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:36:47 +0200 (CEST) | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] genirq: provide means to retrigger parent |
| |
On Tue, 23 Oct 2012, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> writes: > > > On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 03:07:49PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > >> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > >> > >> Attempts to retrigger nested threaded IRQs currently fail because they > >> have no primary handler. In order to support retrigger of nested > >> IRQs, the parent IRQ needs to be retriggered. > >> > >> To fix, when an IRQ needs to be resent, if the interrupt has a parent > >> IRQ and runs in the context of the parent IRQ, then resend the parent. > >> > >> Also, handle_nested_irq() needs to clear the replay flag like the > >> other handlers, otherwise check_irq_resend() will set it and it will > >> never be cleared. Without clearing, it results in the first resend > >> working fine, but check_irq_resend() returning early on subsequent > >> resends because the replay flag is still set. > >> > >> Problem discovered on ARM/OMAP platforms where a nested IRQ that's > >> also a wakeup IRQ happens late in suspend and needed to be retriggered > >> during the resume process. > >> > >> Reported-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> > >> Tested-by: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> > >> [khilman@ti.com: changelog edits, clear IRQS_REPLAY in handle_nested_irq()] > >> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > > > > Umm, we also have the converse situation. We have platforms where the > > resend has to be done from the child IRQ, and the parent must not be > > touched. I hope that doesn't break those. > > I'm assuming the child IRQs you're concerned with are not threaded, > right? This patch only addresses nested, threaded IRQs, and these don't > have a primary handler to run at all, so cannot do any triggering.
And it involves that you activly set the parent irq via the new interface: irq_set_parent()
You don't have that yet or you don't use that in your future changes, then you're good. :)
Thanks,
tglx
| |