On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 19/09/16 10:12, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >> if (handle != handle_bad_irq && is_chained) {
> >> + unsigned int type = irqd_get_trigger_type(&desc->irq_data);
> >> +
> >> /*
> >> * We're about to start this interrupt immediately,
> >> * hence the need to set the trigger configuration.
> >> @@ -828,8 +830,10 @@ __irq_do_set_handler(struct irq_desc *desc,
> >> irq_flow_handler_t handle,
> >> * chained interrupt. Reset it immediately because we
> >> * do know better.
> >> */
> >> - __irq_set_trigger(desc, irqd_get_trigger_type(&desc->irq_data));
> >> - desc->handle_irq = handle;
> >> + if (type != IRQ_TYPE_NONE) {
> >> + __irq_set_trigger(desc, type);
> >> + desc->handle_irq = handle;
> >
> > Are you really sure that the handler should only be set when the trigger
> > type is != NONE? I seriously doubt that this is correct.
>
> The handler has already been set outside of if() statement (at line
> 819). Here, we only set it again if we've actually called
> __irq_set_trigger() which could have changed it to something that takes
> the type into account (handle_level_irq or handle_edge_irq, for example).
Ah. I'll add a comment...
