Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1479988 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] sc16is7xx: drop bogus use of IRQF_ONESHOT

Started bySebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian.siewior@linutronix.de>
First post2016-09-09 15:20 +0200
Last post2016-09-09 15:20 +0200
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH] sc16is7xx: drop bogus use of IRQF_ONESHOT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian.siewior@linutronix.de> - 2016-09-09 15:20 +0200

#1479988 — Re: [PATCH] sc16is7xx: drop bogus use of IRQF_ONESHOT

FromSebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian.siewior@linutronix.de>
Date2016-09-09 15:20 +0200
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sc16is7xx: drop bogus use of IRQF_ONESHOT
Message-ID<sftSN-3gY-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
On 2016-02-18 11:26:12 [-0600], Josh Cartwright wrote:
> The use of IRQF_ONESHOT when registering an interrupt handler with
> request_irq() is non-sensical.
> 
> Not only that, it also prevents the handler from being threaded when it
> otherwise should be w/ IRQ_FORCED_THREADING is enabled.  This causes the
> following deadlock observed by Sean Nyekjaer on -rt:

So we this patch 
  http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1602.2/02637.html

sitting in -RT. Then someone posted
  http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg14975.html
which depends on it.
Before I was are of the first patch, I posted
  http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-rt-users/msg14666.html

and nobody seems to care if anything of this gets merged upstream
where it belongs. Could some please carry this to Greg upstream?

Sebastian

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web