chs@ wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: chs
> Date: Tue Aug 14 15:46:21 UTC 2012
>
> Modified Files:
> src/sys/arch/evbarm/iq80310: iq80310_intr.c
>
> Log Message:
> move evcnt_attach_dynamic() calls later to avoid assertions.
--- src/sys/arch/evbarm/iq80310/iq80310_intr.c 2012/08/02 15:56:07 1.30
+++ src/sys/arch/evbarm/iq80310/iq80310_intr.c 2012/08/14 15:46:21 1.31
@@ -338,8 +338,6 @@ iq80310_intr_init(void)
TAILQ_INIT(&iq->iq_list);
sprintf(iq->iq_name, "irq %d", i);
- evcnt_attach_dynamic(&iq->iq_ev, EVCNT_TYPE_INTR,
- NULL, "iq80310", iq->iq_name);
}
iq80310_intr_calculate_masks();
@@ -379,6 +377,8 @@ iq80310_intr_establish(int irq, int ipl,
oldirqstate = disable_interrupts(I32_bit);
TAILQ_INSERT_TAIL(&iq->iq_list, ih, ih_list);
+ evcnt_attach_dynamic(&iq->iq_ev, EVCNT_TYPE_INTR,
+ NULL, "iq80310", iq->iq_name);
iq80310_intr_calculate_masks();
---
- what happens if intr_establish function is called more than once
against the same irq?
- shouldn't disestablish function have evcnt_detach()?
- isn't it better to defer intr_init() calls after evcnt_init(),
rather than calling evcnt_attach_dynamic() in intr_establish() ?
It looks many other arm intr_init functions
(arm/ep93xx/ep93xx_intr.c, arm/xscale/ixp425_intr.c etc)
have the same problem, though.
(on the other hand marvell variants don't have evcnt at all)
---
Izumi Tsutsui
