> On SMP an interrupt which is raised after the ack() again before the > handler finishes, can invoke another delivery on a different CPU, > which then sees the IRQ_INPROGESS flag, masks it and flags it > PENDING. When the primary handler on the first CPU returns, it sees > the PENDING flag, unmasks and invokes the handler another time. In this case, when IRQ_INPROGRESS flag is set, on another CPU, it will mask and ack it, if before the primary handler on the first CPU returns, the edge interrupt is raised again, it will be lost, right? So I think set PENDING just confirm one time, it just depends on primary handler execution time and irq frequency. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- [PATCH] genirq: for edge interrupt IRQS_ONESHOT support w... Chuansheng Liu
- Re: [PATCH] genirq: for edge interrupt IRQS_ONESHOT s... Thomas Gleixner
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge interrupt IRQS_ONESH... Liu, Chuansheng
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge interrupt IRQS_O... Thomas Gleixner
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge interrupt IR... Liu, Chuansheng
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge interru... Thomas Gleixner
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge int... Liu, Chuansheng
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge... Thomas Gleixner
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge int... Liu, Chuansheng
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge... anish kumar
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge... Liu, Chuansheng
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge... anish kumar
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge... Thomas Gleixner
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge... anish kumar
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge... Thomas Gleixner
- RE: [PATCH] genirq: for edge interrupt IR... Liu, Chuansheng
- irq/manage.c wrong comment( ? ) anish kumar