2014-07-23 11:49 GMT-07:00 Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de>: > On Wed, 23 Jul 2014, Florian Fainelli wrote: > >> It is currently possible for a generic irq chip driver to set IRQ_LEVEL >> and have its irq flow handler be handle_edge_irq. Setting IRQ_LEVEL in >> such a case does not make sense, and will actually prevent e.g: the >> software resend logic from kicking, and potential other problems too. >> >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.com> >> --- >> Changes in v2: >> - replaced WARN_ON() with BUG_ON() since we really don't want to continue >> as suggested by Jason Cooper > > I disagree here. It's not a reason take the machine down. Its good > enough to WARN. That keeps the machine alive and lets us debug that > stuff.
Works for me! > > Lemme find V1 .... Here it is: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/7/1/468 > > >> kernel/irq/chip.c | 7 ++++++- >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/irq/chip.c b/kernel/irq/chip.c >> index a2b28a2fd7b1..17a66b56cd96 100644 >> --- a/kernel/irq/chip.c >> +++ b/kernel/irq/chip.c >> @@ -749,8 +749,13 @@ void irq_modify_status(unsigned int irq, unsigned long >> clr, unsigned long set) >> irqd_set(&desc->irq_data, IRQD_PER_CPU); >> if (irq_settings_can_move_pcntxt(desc)) >> irqd_set(&desc->irq_data, IRQD_MOVE_PCNTXT); >> - if (irq_settings_is_level(desc)) >> + if (irq_settings_is_level(desc)) { >> + /* Setting IRQD_LEVEL does not make sense on non-level >> + * sensitive interrupts >> + */ >> + BUG_ON(desc->handle_irq != handle_level_irq); >> irqd_set(&desc->irq_data, IRQD_LEVEL); >> + } >> >> irqd_set(&desc->irq_data, irq_settings_get_trigger_mask(desc)); >> >> -- >> 1.9.1 >> >> -- Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
