Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Aug 2021 15:45:50 +0100 | From | Marc Zyngier <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 05/13] genirq: Let purely flow-masked ONESHOT irqs through unmask_threaded_irq() |
| |
On Thu, 12 Aug 2021 14:36:35 +0100, Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> wrote: > > On 12/08/21 08:26, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On Tue, 29 Jun 2021 13:50:02 +0100, > > Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com> wrote: > >> diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c > >> index ef30b4762947..e6d6d32ddcbc 100644 > >> --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c > >> +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c > >> @@ -1107,7 +1107,7 @@ static void irq_finalize_oneshot(struct irq_desc *desc, > >> desc->threads_oneshot &= ~action->thread_mask; > >> > >> if (!desc->threads_oneshot && !irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data) && > >> - irqd_irq_masked(&desc->irq_data)) > >> + (irqd_irq_masked(&desc->irq_data) | irqd_irq_flow_masked(&desc->irq_data))) > >> unmask_threaded_irq(desc); > > > > The bitwise OR looks pretty odd. It is probably fine given that both > > side of the expression are bool, but still. I can fix this locally. > > > > Thomas suggested that back in v1: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87v98v4lan.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de/ > > I did look at the (arm64) disassembly diff back then and was convinced by > what I saw, though I'd have to go do that again as I can't remember much > else.
Ah, fair enough.
Thanks,
M.
-- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
| |