Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: kexec: Check if IRQ is already masked before masking

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, Nov 27 2024 at 15:22, Eliav Farber wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/machine_kexec.c b/arch/arm/kernel/machine_kexec.c
> index 80ceb5bd2680..54d0bd1bd449 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/machine_kexec.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/machine_kexec.c
> @@ -142,11 +142,8 @@ static void machine_kexec_mask_interrupts(void)
>               if (chip->irq_eoi && irqd_irq_inprogress(&desc->irq_data))
>                       chip->irq_eoi(&desc->irq_data);
>  
> -             if (chip->irq_mask)
> -                     chip->irq_mask(&desc->irq_data);
> -
> -             if (chip->irq_disable && !irqd_irq_disabled(&desc->irq_data))
> -                     chip->irq_disable(&desc->irq_data);
> +             irq_set_status_flags(i, IRQ_DISABLE_UNLAZY);
> +             irq_disable(desc);

This is just wrong. If the interrupt was torn down, then its state is
deactivated and it was masked already. So the EOI handling and the
mask/disable dance are neither required nor make sense.

So this whole thing should be:

                chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
-               if (!chip)
+               if (!chip || !irqd_is_started(&desc->irq_data))
                        continue;

But what's worse is that we have 4 almost identical variants of the same
code.

So instead of exposing core functionality and "fixing" up four variants,
can we please have a consolidated version of this function in the core
code:
                struct irq_chip *chip;
                int check_eoi = 1;

                chip = irq_desc_get_chip(desc);
                if (!chip || !irqd_is_started(&desc->irq_data))
                        continue;

                if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_.....)) {
                        /*
                         * Add a sensible comment which explains this.
                         */
                        check_eoi = irq_set_irqchip_state(....);
                }

                if (check_eoi && ....)
                        chip->irq_eoi(&desc->irq_data);

                irq_shutdown(desc);

No?

Thanks,

        tglx