Get rid of IRQF_DISABLED - (was [PATCH] genirq: warn about IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED)
Andrew Victor
avictor.za at gmail.com
Mon Nov 30 15:15:38 EST 2009
hi,
> There is hardware out there (AT91) where
> the timer interrupt is shared with other peripherals, and you end
> up with a mixture of irqs-disabled and irqs-enabled handlers sharing
> the same interrupt.
For the AT91 case I don't think this shouldn't matter.
The AT91's have a priority-level interrupt controller, so:
1. a lower-priority interrupt won't interrupt a higher-priority
2. shared interrupts cannot interrupt each other until irq_finish()
is called (a write to AIC_EOICR)
Since the Timer, DBGU serial port (and other system peripherals) are
on the same priority level they cannot interrupt each other.
(ie, basically as-if always irqs-disabled).
The case of irqs-enabled does means that a higher-priority interrupt
could interrupt [*], but it's not a shared-IRQ in that case.
([*] The system peripherals have the highest priority by default, so
the user would need to override the defaults for this to occur)
Regards,
Andrew Victor
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list