From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752537AbbJTTZL (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:25:11 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:52101 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751051AbbJTTZJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2015 15:25:09 -0400 Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 21:24:24 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Russell King - ARM Linux cc: Thomas Petazzoni , Jason Cooper , Lior Amsalem , Andrew Lunn , Tawfik Bayouk , Marc Zyngier , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nadav Haklai , Gregory Clement , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Sebastian Hesselbarth Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Fix regression introduced by set_irq_flags() removal In-Reply-To: <20151020141736.GX32532@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: References: <1445347435-2333-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <20151020140427.GE3953@io.lakedaemon.net> <20151020160828.497fcc80@free-electrons.com> <20151020141736.GX32532@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 04:08:28PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > As discussed on IRC, another simpler (code line wise) solution is to > > simply clear the IRQ_NOAUTOEN flag in the irq-armada-370-xp, which > > brings us back to what set_irq_flags() was doing, without actually > > reverting Rob's patch. > > > > However, relying on IRQ_NOAUTOEN being cleared doesn't seem like the > > right long term solution, which is why I implemented what I believe is > > a (hopefully) better long term solution. > > However, this is rather worrying. NOAUTOEN is supposed to avoid enabling > the interrupt when the interrupt is claimed. > > If, as a result of Rob's patch, we now have a load of IRQs which are > marked with NOAUTOEN which weren't, that's quite a large regression - > possibly one which hasn't been properly found (not everyone tests -rc > kernels) and we may be better to revert Rob's patch to avoid lots of > breakge being reported when 4.3 is released. > > I think Rob's patches need another review in light of this, to determine > how much breakage there is here, and a decision how to proceed made on > that basis. I'll go over them tomorrow again and decide then what to do. Thanks, tglx