lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] genirq: use irq_mask as fallback for irq_disable.
On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:41:02 +0200 Andreas Fenkart <andreas.fenkart@streamunlimited.com> wrote:

> This is in line with irq_enable that uses the same fallback.
> When masked, interrupts are still latched into the status register
> so when unmasked there is an interrupt straight away.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c
> @@ -216,10 +216,11 @@ void irq_enable(struct irq_desc *desc)
> void irq_disable(struct irq_desc *desc)
> {
> irq_state_set_disabled(desc);
> - if (desc->irq_data.chip->irq_disable) {
> + if (desc->irq_data.chip->irq_disable)
> desc->irq_data.chip->irq_disable(&desc->irq_data);
> - irq_state_set_masked(desc);
> - }
> + else
> + desc->irq_data.chip->irq_mask(&desc->irq_data);
> + irq_state_set_masked(desc);
> }
>
> void irq_percpu_enable(struct irq_desc *desc, unsigned int cpu)

Well I hope Thomas knows what this patch does, because I sure don't.

Does it fix a bug? Does it add a bug? Does it have any
runtime-observable effects at all? If so, what are they?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-04-23 01:41    [W:0.039 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site