Damien Zammit, le ven. 08 mars 2024 06:57:47 +0000, a ecrit: > I think we need to allow the irq handler to be called one more time, > because we don't know if there is a pending interrupt until we need > to handle one. > Once we enable the irq one more time, it is necessary > to handle the last interrupt before quitting the handler.
I believe we still don't need to call the application handler. The fact that the application calls irqhelp_remove_interrupt_handler means that it's done with the hardware, and doesn't care about getting notified of more interrupts. Worse, we should really *not* call the handler one more time after irqhelp_remove_interrupt_handler returns, since the application could very well want to deinitialize some data and whatnot that the handler could try to access. Leaving the application handler pointer recorded somewhere without actually letting the application control when it's actually finished being used is asking for trouble :) And I really think the application doesn't need any more notification after calling irqhelp_remove_interrupt_handler anyway. Samuel
