[RESEND][PATCH -tip] irq: DEBUG_SHIRQ executed on irq setup failure

[RESEND][PATCH -tip] irq: DEBUG_SHIRQ executed on irq setup failure

[Luis Henriques]

When requesting an IRQ, the DEBUG_SHIRQ code executes a fake IRQ just to make
sure the driver is ready to receive an IRQ immediately.  The problem was that
this fake IRQ was being executed even if interrupt line failed to be allocated
by __setup_irq.

Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
---
 kernel/irq/manage.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
index a3eb7ba..39a0f4d 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
@@ -914,7 +914,7 @@ int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
 		kfree(action);
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
-	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
+	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
 		/*
 		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
 		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....
-- 
1.6.2.1

[tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Luis Henriques]

Commit-ID:  ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
Author:     Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
AuthorDate: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:06:35 +0100
Committer:  Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
CommitDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 16:02:39 +0200

genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

When requesting an IRQ, the DEBUG_SHIRQ code executes a fake IRQ just to make
sure the driver is ready to receive an IRQ immediately.  The problem was that
this fake IRQ was being executed even if interrupt line failed to be allocated
by __setup_irq.

Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
LKML-Reference: <20090401170635.GA4392@hades.domain.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>


---
 kernel/irq/manage.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
index 1516ab7..beeb7d1 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
@@ -768,7 +768,7 @@ int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
 		kfree(action);
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
-	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
+	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
 		/*
 		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
 		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Jaswinder Singh Rajput]

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 14:03 +0000, Luis Henriques wrote:
> Commit-ID:  ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
> Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
> Author:     Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
> AuthorDate: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:06:35 +0100
> Committer:  Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> CommitDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 16:02:39 +0200
> 
> genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed
> 
> When requesting an IRQ, the DEBUG_SHIRQ code executes a fake IRQ just to make
> sure the driver is ready to receive an IRQ immediately.  The problem was that
> this fake IRQ was being executed even if interrupt line failed to be allocated
> by __setup_irq.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
> LKML-Reference: <20090401170635.GA4392@hades.domain.com>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> 
> ---
>  kernel/irq/manage.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> index 1516ab7..beeb7d1 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> @@ -768,7 +768,7 @@ int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
>  		kfree(action);
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
> -	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
> +	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
>  		/*
>  		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
>  		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....

What is this ?

There is no retval:

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=blob;f=kernel/irq/manage.c;h=a3eb7baf1e46f2c735edb4cc44e0386cfbc4989e;hb=HEAD

*/
696 static struct irqaction *__free_irq(unsigned int irq, void *dev_id)
697 {
698         struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
699         struct irqaction *action, **action_ptr;
700         struct task_struct *irqthread;
701         unsigned long flags;
702 
703         WARN(in_interrupt(), "Trying to free IRQ %
d from IRQ context!\n", irq);
704 
705         if (!desc)
706                 return NULL;
707 
708         spin_lock_irqsave(&desc->lock, flags);
709 
710         /*
711
         * There can be multiple actions per IRQ descriptor, find the right
712          * one based on the dev_id:
713          */
714         action_ptr = &desc->action;
715         for (;;) {
716                 action = *action_ptr;
717 
718                 if (!action) {
719                         WARN(1, "Trying to free already-free IRQ %d
\n", irq);
720                         spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
721 
722                         return NULL;
723                 }
724 
725                 if (action->dev_id == dev_id)
726                         break;
727                 action_ptr = &action->next;
728         }
729 
730         /* Found it - now remove it from the list of entries: */
731         *action_ptr = action->next;
732 
733         /* Currently used only by UML, might disappear one day: */
734 #ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_RELEASE_METHOD
735         if (desc->chip->release)
736                 desc->chip->release(irq, dev_id);
737 #endif
738 
739         /* If this was the last handler, shut down the IRQ line: */
740         if (!desc->action) {
741                 desc->status |= IRQ_DISABLED;
742                 if (desc->chip->shutdown)
743                         desc->chip->shutdown(irq);
744                 else
745                         desc->chip->disable(irq);
746         }
747 
748         irqthread = action->thread;
749         action->thread = NULL;
750 
751         spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
752 
753         unregister_handler_proc(irq, action);
754 
755         /* Make sure it's not being used on another CPU: */
756         synchronize_irq(irq);
757 
758         if (irqthread) {
759                 if (!test_bit(IRQTF_DIED, &action->thread_flags))
760                         kthread_stop(irqthread);
761                 put_task_struct(irqthread);
762         }
763 
764 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
765         /*
766
         * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for an IRQ
767
         * event to happen even now it's being freed, so let's make sure that
768          * is so by doing an extra call to the handler ....
769          *
770
         * ( We do this after actually deregistering it, to make sure that a
771          *   'real' IRQ doesn't run in * parallel with our fake. )
772          */
773         if (action->flags & IRQF_SHARED) {
774                 local_irq_save(flags);
775                 action->handler(irq, dev_id);
776                 local_irq_restore(flags);
777         }
778 #endif
779         return action;
780 }

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 14:03 +0000, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > Commit-ID:  ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
> > Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
> > Author:     Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
> > AuthorDate: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:06:35 +0100
> > Committer:  Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > CommitDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 16:02:39 +0200
> > 
> > genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed
> > 
> > When requesting an IRQ, the DEBUG_SHIRQ code executes a fake IRQ just to make
> > sure the driver is ready to receive an IRQ immediately.  The problem was that
> > this fake IRQ was being executed even if interrupt line failed to be allocated
> > by __setup_irq.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
> > LKML-Reference: <20090401170635.GA4392@hades.domain.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > 
> > 
> > ---
> >  kernel/irq/manage.c |    2 +-
> >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> > index 1516ab7..beeb7d1 100644
> > --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
> > +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> > @@ -768,7 +768,7 @@ int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
> >  		kfree(action);
> >  
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
> > -	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
> > +	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
> >  		/*
> >  		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
> >  		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....
> 
> What is this ?

You looking at the wrong place.
 
> There is no retval:
> 
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=blob;f=kernel/irq/manage.c;h=a3eb7baf1e46f2c735edb4cc44e0386cfbc4989e;hb=HEAD

Care to read patches you want to comment on carefully _BEFORE_ you
start yelling at people and sending useless copies of the wrong
function around the world.

The patch is perfectly fine and already applied.

Thanks,

	tglx

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Jaswinder Singh Rajput]

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 17:21 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 14:03 +0000, Luis Henriques wrote:
> > > Commit-ID:  ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
> > > Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/ba71604fad348656071a2a76eef9a67dab85a773
> > > Author:     Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
> > > AuthorDate: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:06:35 +0100
> > > Committer:  Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > > CommitDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 16:02:39 +0200
> > > 
> > > genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed
> > > 
> > > When requesting an IRQ, the DEBUG_SHIRQ code executes a fake IRQ just to make
> > > sure the driver is ready to receive an IRQ immediately.  The problem was that
> > > this fake IRQ was being executed even if interrupt line failed to be allocated
> > > by __setup_irq.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
> > > LKML-Reference: <20090401170635.GA4392@hades.domain.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > > 
> > > 
> > > ---
> > >  kernel/irq/manage.c |    2 +-
> > >  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> > > index 1516ab7..beeb7d1 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
> > > @@ -768,7 +768,7 @@ int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
> > >  		kfree(action);
> > >  
> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
> > > -	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
> > > +	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
> > >  		/*
> > >  		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
> > >  		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....
> > 
> > What is this ?
> 
> You looking at the wrong place.
>  
> > There is no retval:
> > 
> > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=blob;f=kernel/irq/manage.c;h=a3eb7baf1e46f2c735edb4cc44e0386cfbc4989e;hb=HEAD
> 
> Care to read patches you want to comment on carefully _BEFORE_ you
> start yelling at people and sending useless copies of the wrong
> function around the world.
> 
> The patch is perfectly fine and already applied.
> 

Yes, I know somehow you applied it. When you will merge this branch with
-tip/master then you will understand what I am saying.

Even function name is changed from:

713 int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
714
                unsigned long irqflags, const char *devname, void *dev_id)
715 {
716         struct irqaction *action;
717         struct irq_desc *desc;
718         int retval;

to:

857 int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
858
                         irq_handler_t thread_fn, unsigned long irqflags,
859                          const char *devname, void *dev_id)
860 {
861         struct irqaction *action;
862         struct irq_desc *desc;
863         int retval;


--
JSR

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > >  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
> > > > -	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
> > > > +	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
> > > >  		/*
> > > >  		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
> > > >  		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....
> > > 
> > > What is this ?
> > 
> > You looking at the wrong place.
> >  
> > > There is no retval:
> > > 
> > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=blob;f=kernel/irq/manage.c;h=a3eb7baf1e46f2c735edb4cc44e0386cfbc4989e;hb=HEAD
> > 
> > Care to read patches you want to comment on carefully _BEFORE_ you
> > start yelling at people and sending useless copies of the wrong
> > function around the world.
> > 
> > The patch is perfectly fine and already applied.
> > 
> 
> Yes, I know somehow you applied it. When you will merge this branch with
> -tip/master then you will understand what I am saying.

Jaswinder. I really start to get annoyed. 

That patch applies fine on master as well.
 
> Even function name is changed from:
>
> 713 int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
> 
> 857 int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,

And why is this fcking relevant ? 

Take the patch and try to apply it. It applies perfectly fine on
tip/master. And it is still _CORRECT_ there.

If you don't know how to read a patch and don't know the code it
applies to then taking it and applying it is the minimum you could do
before wasting everybodys time.

Stop this nonsense before I get really grumpy,

     tglx

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Jaswinder Singh Rajput]

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 18:08 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > > >  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
> > > > > -	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
> > > > > +	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
> > > > >  		/*
> > > > >  		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
> > > > >  		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....
> > > > 
> > > > What is this ?
> > > 
> > > You looking at the wrong place.
> > >  
> > > > There is no retval:
> > > > 
> > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=blob;f=kernel/irq/manage.c;h=a3eb7baf1e46f2c735edb4cc44e0386cfbc4989e;hb=HEAD
> > > 
> > > Care to read patches you want to comment on carefully _BEFORE_ you
> > > start yelling at people and sending useless copies of the wrong
> > > function around the world.
> > > 
> > > The patch is perfectly fine and already applied.
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, I know somehow you applied it. When you will merge this branch with
> > -tip/master then you will understand what I am saying.
> 
> Jaswinder. I really start to get annoyed. 
> 
> That patch applies fine on master as well.
>  
> > Even function name is changed from:
> >
> > 713 int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
> > 
> > 857 int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
> 
> And why is this fcking relevant ? 
> 

I am dead sure, you really need some good manners and need to learn many
things.

> Take the patch and try to apply it. It applies perfectly fine on
> tip/master. And it is still _CORRECT_ there.
> 
> If you don't know how to read a patch and don't know the code it
> applies to then taking it and applying it is the minimum you could do
> before wasting everybodys time.
> 
> Stop this nonsense before I get really grumpy,
> 

That's the only thing you can do.

--
JSR

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> 
> I am dead sure, you really need some good manners and need to learn many
> things.

Ok. Now it's definitly enough.

You started yelling at the patch submitter in an unfriendly and
totally unjustified way. And your analysis of the patch was completely
wrong as well.

I pointed that out to you and instead of thinking for a minute you
insist on your completely wrong analysis and tell me another time
about the code which I know probably better than most of the kernel
hackers.

The question arises who needs manners and who needs to learn things.

	tglx

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Jaswinder Singh Rajput]

On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 18:38 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > 
> > I am dead sure, you really need some good manners and need to learn many
> > things.
> 
> Ok. Now it's definitly enough.
> 
> You started yelling at the patch submitter 

I do not yell at patch submitter, I yell at you. Like you always do on
anothers without any reason.

> in an unfriendly and

unfriendly, do you know what is the meaning of friendly ?



> The question arises who needs manners and who needs to learn things.
> 

----->	tglx

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Luis Henriques]

Uau!  I have never seen such a trivial patch (although first version of it was
stupidly buggy!) causing this kind of discussions! :-)

Anyway, I believe the tech-related part of the initial question has been solved
(sorry for taking so long to read/reply).  With respect to the non-tech-part...
I'm out :-)

--
Luis Henriques

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Ingo Molnar]

Jaswinder,

Let me transcribe what happened:

* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 18:08 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > > > >  #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
> > > > > > -	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
> > > > > > +	if (!retval & (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
> > > > > >  		/*
> > > > > >  		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
> > > > > >  		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....
> > > > > 
> > > > > What is this ?

[ Jaswinder misunderstands a patch and asks a rather stupid question 
  in a demanding tone and does not go into any level of detail why 
  he thinks the patch is wrong. Just a single look into the source 
  code file in question would have shown him his mistake. ]

> > > > 
> > > > You looking at the wrong place.

[ Thomas, the genirq maintainer, points out Jaswinder's error 
  calmly. ]

> > > >  
> > > > > There is no retval:
> > > > > 
> > > > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=blob;f=kernel/irq/manage.c;h=a3eb7baf1e46f2c735edb4cc44e0386cfbc4989e;hb=HEAD
> > > > 
> > > > Care to read patches you want to comment on carefully _BEFORE_ you
> > > > start yelling at people and sending useless copies of the wrong
> > > > function around the world.
> > > > 
> > > > The patch is perfectly fine and already applied.

[ Thomas also asks Jaswinder to think things through before wasting 
  other people's time. ]

> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Yes, I know somehow you applied it. When you will merge this branch with
> > > -tip/master then you will understand what I am saying.

[ Jaswinder is being difficult: he writes that Thomas "somehow"
  applied the patch - ignoring the fact that Thomas is the 
  maintainer of this code.

  Jaswinder is also suggesting in a condescending tone that Thomas
  does not understand the issue - while the code is perfectly fine 
  and it is Jaswinder who is trivially wrong.

  Wasting more of Thomas's time. ]

> > Jaswinder. I really start to get annoyed. 
> > 

[ Thomas, understandably, being into the 4th mail of a thread that 
  should not have happened at all, is getting annoyed. ]

> > That patch applies fine on master as well.

[ Thomas points out another mistake in Jaswinder's argument. ]

> > > Even function name is changed from:
> > >
> > > 713 int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
> > > 
> > > 857 int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,

[ Jaswinder shows evidence of even more stupidity: he points out to 
  Thomas that a function changed its name, forgetting two things: 
  that 1) it is irrelevant and 2) Thomas did the rename in question. ]

> > 
> > And why is this fcking relevant ? 

[ Thomas is really annoyed at Jaswinder writing wrong, 
  irrelevant, time wasting mails without showing any sign of 
  understanding the issues and without admitting fault. ]

> > 
> 
> I am dead sure, you really need some good manners and need to 
> learn many things.

[ Jaswinder, still not admitting his fault, compounds his mistakes
  by being even more condescending. ]

Jaswinder, this is really not an acceptable pattern of behavior on 
lkml.

	Ingo

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Jaswinder Singh Rajput]

Ingo,

> Jaswinder, this is really not an acceptable pattern of behavior on 
> lkml.
> 

Check last 50 emails from him. He is treating others like his slaves and
use bad words.

I was just trying to teach him how other feels when some one shout on
them without any reason.

If possible please also teach some manners to him and tell him to keep
his ugly mouth shut if he do not know how to speak with others.

I am surprise how you are accepting his unacceptable pattern.

--
JSR

Re: [tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[Ingo Molnar]

* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:

> Ingo,
> 
> > Jaswinder, this is really not an acceptable pattern of behavior 
> > on lkml.
> 
> Check last 50 emails from him. He is treating others like his 
> slaves and use bad words.

If you have a problem with someone you should take that to private 
mail or elsewhere. This is a mailing list for technical discussions 
and the technical content of your mails here was wrong and incorrect 
at every level.

	Ingo

[tip:irq/genirq] genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

[tip-bot for Luis Henriques]

Commit-ID:  6ce51c431019310ca03371355a4366c4649fa349
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/6ce51c431019310ca03371355a4366c4649fa349
Author:     Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
AuthorDate: Wed, 1 Apr 2009 18:06:35 +0100
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
CommitDate: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 08:45:48 +0200

genirq: do not execute DEBUG_SHIRQ when irq setup failed

When requesting an IRQ, the DEBUG_SHIRQ code executes a fake IRQ just to make
sure the driver is ready to receive an IRQ immediately.  The problem was that
this fake IRQ was being executed even if interrupt line failed to be allocated
by __setup_irq.

Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques <henrix@sapo.pt>
LKML-Reference: <20090401170635.GA4392@hades.domain.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
[ fixed bug pointed out by a warning reported by Stephen Rothwell ]
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>


---
 kernel/irq/manage.c |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
index 1516ab7..8c68d5b 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
@@ -768,7 +768,7 @@ int request_irq(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler,
 		kfree(action);
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_SHIRQ
-	if (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED) {
+	if (!retval && (irqflags & IRQF_SHARED)) {
 		/*
 		 * It's a shared IRQ -- the driver ought to be prepared for it
 		 * to happen immediately, so let's make sure....