Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1697468
| From | Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback |
| Date | 2017-07-26 20:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <u7zei-3PM-13@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <u6PO9-8bd-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <u77L4-3dw-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <u77UK-3gI-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <u784q-3jY-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <u784r-3jY-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 07/25/2017 06:29 AM, Måns Rullgård wrote: > Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com> writes: > >> On 25/07/2017 15:16, Måns Rullgård wrote: >> >>> What happened to the patch adding the proper combined function? >> >> It appears you're not CCed on v2. >> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9859799/ >> >> Doug wrote: >>> Yes, you understand correctly. The irq_mask_ack method is entirely >>> optional and I assume that is why this issue went undetected for so >>> long; however, it is slightly more efficient to combine the functions >>> (even if the ack is unnecessary) which is why I chose to do so for my >>> changes to the irqchip-brcmstb-l2 driver where I first discovered this >>> issue. How much value the improved efficiency has is certainly >>> debatable, but interrupt handling is one area where people might care >>> about such a small difference. As the irqchip-tango driver maintainer >>> you are welcome to decide whether or not the irq_mask_ack method makes >>> sense to you. >> >> My preference goes to leaving the irq_mask_ack callback undefined, >> and let the irqchip framework use irq_mask and irq_ack instead. > > Why would you prefer the less efficient way? > Same question here, that does not really make sense to me. The whole point of this patch series is to have a set of efficient and bugfree (or nearly) helper functions that drivers can rely on, are you saying that somehow using irq_mask_and_ack is exposing a bug in the tango irqchip driver and using the separate functions does not expose this bug? -- Florian
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v2 2/6] irqchip/tango: Use irq_gc_mask_disable_and_ack_set Doug Berger <opendmb@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 21:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] irqchip/tango: Use irq_gc_mask_disable_and_ack_set Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com> - 2017-07-24 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] irqchip/tango: Use irq_gc_mask_disable_and_ack_set Doug Berger <opendmb@gmail.com> - 2017-07-24 20:00 +0200
[PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com> - 2017-07-25 15:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Måns Rullgård <mans@mansr.com> - 2017-07-25 15:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com> - 2017-07-25 15:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Måns Rullgård <mans@mansr.com> - 2017-07-25 15:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> - 2017-07-26 20:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Måns Rullgård <mans@mansr.com> - 2017-07-26 21:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com> - 2017-07-27 20:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com> - 2017-07-28 16:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack callback Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com> - 2017-07-25 16:20 +0200
csiph-web