On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 00:15 +0800, Chuansheng Liu wrote: > Not all irq chips are IO-APIC chip. > > In our system, there are many demux GPIO interrupts except for the > io-apic chip interrupts, and these GPIO interrupts are belonged > to other irq chips, the chip data is not type of struct irq_cfg > either. > > But in function __setup_vector_irq(), it listed all allocated irqs, > and presume all irq chip is ioapic_chip and the chip data is type > of struct irq_cfg, it possibly causes the vector_irq is corrupted > randomly. > > For example, one irq 258 is not io-apic chip irq, in __setup_vector_irq(), > the chip data is forced to be used as struct irq_cfg, then the value > cfg->domain and cfg->vector are wrong to be used to write vector_irq: > vector = cfg->vector; > per_cpu(vector_irq, cpu)[vector] = irq; > > This patch use the .flags to identify if the irq chip is io-apic.
I have a feeling that your gpio driver is abusing the 'chip_data' in the struct irq_data. Shouldn't the driver be using 'handler_data' instead? >From include/linux/irq.h: * @handler_data: per-IRQ data for the irq_chip methods * @chip_data: platform-specific per-chip private data for the chip * methods, to allow shared chip implementations Also, how are these routed to the processors and the mechanism of the vector assignment for these irq's? I presume irq_cfg is needed for the setup and the interrupt migration from one cpu to another. What am I missing? thanks, suresh -- 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/
