From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CFBD490BF5 for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2026 20:42:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786048944; cv=none; b=urEFVFgHOXWYquU+GkCqgherhjld/XxROVrRRHuRrJBjaFjisjVGFq1RMIKhpOT0qxLKT0C6HK2zPhztJMuUBkM9i4PWV4U8U9ODXhq1qEigSYm5wKBW75U2PCMLTSVajZbzZbbOdau9wT8DvJmj0xchWHOL503qCMk8fMMpgrU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786048944; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gAPr7dBMCf8yUzJi59dnnodBINCClaGWigQ3oRl4LAU=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=J9GFmN4U+qehkKw4OTj6O6wGVpfcYGMURb6yF6Ze+jhyf7N46QItEfycUbX/Wl9LL2ORpdvEuSh38r840H1gdhQEDGV1Zw2a8U6JL9hAEIY8YFj186CQkSz78kSKp9O/ZVUgfmKMmgOXPVu2mIPQL+co5ihAXqCrpyb/+CUxLNw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=njpWWtY9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="njpWWtY9" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0D4611F00A3D for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2026 20:42:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1786048943; bh=gAPr7dBMCf8yUzJi59dnnodBINCClaGWigQ3oRl4LAU=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc; b=njpWWtY9L4CCBVCNL79r6UcJM0MgGWTFuf9AQO7D2ovOAP6+kJsbL22+KVDR1enag fsIQA0AsIzyl/FFpwi7kPDWimPzvvxUKLkqi8hw6aGMWsyES58jHaKeOZvK+u8ZnBt SsQucaQLQU1D1Q2OKxMI0tmtkvuBeF939AhsNDq/S93hPS0Lbp/rqmDQjdmCU7lnAE kvZdkkq+F/iFCxyXkX4+SUHQknbqzHa/LwCHmtF0TbGPds5TYcYJSGM9XQ1fuOtQCP R9+HokI3xE495wutLZxSr3OrGXODvb53YyQR/1bf0G6es3UvVyJIVhtNt9JFqxWvrO aGdfWcyb9OwOg== Received: by mail-lf1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5aeb2bc82ccso3287421e87.2 for ; Thu, 06 Aug 2026 13:42:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RrQNhiDttV/VYZY0ReaFQLUyWF0EmjLph3OAJOeG4H3L1Sydbd3KeamZVZiFt8XEJs7gZl5d4PxptDE3gc=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxsoe17OlojL+7MhoX4CsjmIEK/epeT9OJiHXc08bw9EssvUFWx aNIj67qHsVEQXE2Vm4ZzCZHfRNTbn8ShSDxveKImHiyicpgNdQHWAWeheyc48dt0wzeBwVpv4OD TrpZrdab2Vke1Zz/HKcBeAKUdrFpV/BU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:2388:b0:5b0:1b0a:2370 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5b2f4b960aemr2506954e87.2.1786048941742; Thu, 06 Aug 2026 13:42:21 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20260623-arm-generic-irq-entry-v7-1-v1-1-f25ca7079e3b@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: From: Linus Walleij Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 22:42:09 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: X-Gm-Features: AUfX_mw8cHybIofmmWvpUNOCHVFuyexHEc1HC_i-wCbtiWbMWu4jBHqLm_Y5234 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: entry: Convert IRQ handling to generic IRQ entry To: Jinjie Ruan Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Arnd Bergmann , Russell King , Oleg Nesterov , Thomas Gleixner , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Jinjie, sorry for slow return to this topic :/ On Sat, Jun 27, 2026 at 4:57=E2=80=AFAM Jinjie Ruan = wrote: > I have a small suggestion regarding the `interrupts_enabled` logic. If > arm32 could also implement `regs_irqs_disabled(regs)` (similar to what > arm64 and some other architectures already have), we might be able to > unify this across subsystems. Yes, the patch implements this, hehe :) > Specifically, we could then replace the custom `interrupts_enabled` > usage in both the arm64 architecture code and drivers like > `drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c`. That should already be possible with this patch. I could also make a patch to replace all uses of interrupts_enabled() with regs_irqs_disabled() as a follow-up to this patch (which introduces regs_irqs_disabled()) if it gets accepted, I don't know if that's a good idea though, maybe it makes the code harder to read? Yours, Linus Walleij