On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On 24/11/14 20:38, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > So while I cannot come up with a brilliant replacement, it would be
> > really helpful documentation wise if you could do the following:
> >
> > 1) Create a patch which introduces irq_migration_lock as a
On 24/11/14 20:41, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> I did want to remove the lock too. However when I reviewed this code I
>> concluded the lock was still required. Without it I think it is possible
>> for gic_raise_softirq() to raise an IPI on the old core
On 24/11/14 20:38, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> I did want to remove the lock too. However when I reviewed this code I
> concluded the lock was still required. Without it I think it is possible
> for gic_raise_softirq() to raise an IPI on the old core *after* the code
> to migrate pending IPIs has
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> > > index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> >
On 24/11/14 18:48, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
>>> index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
>>> +++
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> > index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> > @@ -73,6 +73,13
On 24/11/14 18:20, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
>> index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
>> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
>> @@ -73,6 +73,13 @@
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
> --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
> @@ -73,6 +73,13 @@ struct gic_chip_data {
> static
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
@@ -73,6 +73,13 @@ struct gic_chip_data {
static
On 24/11/14 18:20, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
@@ -73,6 +73,13 @@ struct
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
@@ -73,6 +73,13 @@ struct
On 24/11/14 18:48, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
+++
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
+++
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
I did want to remove the lock too. However when I reviewed this code I
concluded the lock was still required. Without it I think it is possible
for gic_raise_softirq() to raise an IPI on the old core *after* the code
to migrate pending IPIs has been
On 24/11/14 20:38, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-gic.c
index 38493ff28fa5..0db62a6f1ee3 100644
---
On 24/11/14 20:41, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
I did want to remove the lock too. However when I reviewed this code I
concluded the lock was still required. Without it I think it is possible
for gic_raise_softirq() to raise an IPI on the old core *after*
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014, Daniel Thompson wrote:
On 24/11/14 20:38, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
So while I cannot come up with a brilliant replacement, it would be
really helpful documentation wise if you could do the following:
1) Create a patch which introduces irq_migration_lock as a raw
Currently calling printk() from a FIQ can result in deadlock on
irq_controller_lock within gic_raise_softirq(). This occurs because
printk(), which is otherwise structured to survive calls from FIQ/NMI,
calls this function to raise an IPI when it needs to wake_up_klogd().
This patch fixes the
Currently calling printk() from a FIQ can result in deadlock on
irq_controller_lock within gic_raise_softirq(). This occurs because
printk(), which is otherwise structured to survive calls from FIQ/NMI,
calls this function to raise an IPI when it needs to wake_up_klogd().
This patch fixes the
20 matches
Mail list logo
