[PATCH] ARM: gic: use handle_fasteoi_irq for SPIs

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 16 Feb 2011, Rabin Vincent wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 21:47, Will Deacon <will.deacon at arm.com> wrote:
> > Ah yes, thanks for the explanation. After looking at the plat-omap code
> > I finally understand what's going on and I can't help but feel that the
> > chained GPIO handlers are terminally broken! The generic irq chip high-level
> > handlers (handle_{edge,level}_irq for example) at least check to see if
> > the irq_chip functions are non-NULL before calling them.
> >
> > Ideally, the chained handler would be able to query the irq_chip to find
> > out what types of IRQ flow-control it supports and then assume that behaviour.
> 
> Thomas, suggestions on how best to handle this?  (Some of these chained
> handlers are the ones in plat-omap/gpio.c, plat-nomadik/gpio.c, and
> mach-s5pv310/irq-combiner.c.)

I'm not much of a fan of those chained handlers. They work fine, when
they are tied into the irq_chip implementation of a SoC where the
chained handler code is 1:1 related to that irq_chip.

Once you start assigning those handlers somewhere else or even using
the same handler for different underlying primary irq chips, then it's
a lost case and wreckage like this is just lurking around the corner.

The only sane way to deal with this is to install a regular interrupt
handler with request/setup_irq() and do the demultiplexing from
there. That way the demux handler does not have to worry about the
underlying primary chip at all. It does not have to worry whether this
chip uses level, fasteoi, edge or whatever. It just works.

The runtime overhead of going through that path is minimal and really
not worth the pain.

Thanks,

	tglx