[PATCH] genirq: move mask_cache into struct irq_chip_type
gerlando.falauto at keymile.com
Mon Mar 4 09:28:14 EST 2013
I know this issue is from two years ago...
On 07/27/2011 10:45 AM, saeed bishara wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 6:39 PM, Simon Guinot <simon at sequanux.org> wrote:
>> Hi Saeed,
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 05:35:50PM +0300, saeed bishara wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 3:49 AM, Simon Guinot <simon at sequanux.org> wrote:
>>>> From: Simon Guinot <sguinot at lacie.com>
>>>> This fixes a regression introduced by e59347a
>>>> "arm: orion: Use generic irq chip".
>>>> The same interrupt mask cache (stored within struct irq_chip_generic)
>>>> is shared between all the irq_chip_type instances. As each irq_chip_type
>>>> can use a distinct mask register, share a single mask cache is not
>>>> correct. This bug affects Orion SoCs, which have separate mask registers
>>>> for edge and level interrupts.
>>>> This patch move mask_cache from struct irq_chip_generic into struct
>>>> irq_chip_type. Note that the interrupt support for Samsung SoCs is also
>>>> slightly affected.
>>> The patch looks to fix the issue with orion, but it seems that it
>>> won't work for SoC with multiple irq_chip_type that use one mask
>> Yes indeed, but does such SoCs exists ? I mean that the only supported
>> SoC using multiple irq_chip_type (for now) is Orion.
> thats right, but as you code is generic, we should find some way to
> fix it or to prevent such devices to use this generic code.
> What is the most
>> generic case for edge/level interrupts ? shared or separated mask
>> registers ?
> orion gpios use separate mask.
>> If Orion is the specific case, maybe we could provide a dedicated
>> irq_mask() handler instead of using the generic one. It would be a
>> little sad.
> I personally prefer this method, along with getting rid off the
> multiple irq_chip_types, my main consideration in this case is
> the irq_gc_mask_clr_bit/irq_gc_ack_set_bit/irq_gc_unmask_enable_reg
> are critical since it get called for every (level) interrupt, and it
> would be great if you optimize those functions,
> I think you better do the following:
> 1. use pre-calculated offsets instead using gc->reg_base + cur_regs(d)->ack.
> 2. put all hot variables (lock, mask/ack/eoi register offset) in the
> same cache line if possible.
I ran into the same problem (currently running 3.0.40)... but it looks
like this patch was never applied anywhere.
I also quickly scanned the log between now and then and could not find
any reference to this problem. Was a fix ever committed or we still have
Thanks a lot!
More information about the linux-arm-kernel