From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>, Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@googlemail.com>, Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "irqchip: irq-dove: Add PMU interrupt controller." Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 19:20:05 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20140305192005.GX21483@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw) In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1403051445020.18573@ionos.tec.linutronix.de> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 03:42:34PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > This results in the RTC alarm test receiving exactly one interrupt for > > each alarm expiry, as it should do. Thoughts? > > You are worried about clearing an interrupt which is transitory and > not kept active at the device level until you handled it for real, > right? Yep. Let's take the code: ldr r0, [r1] ; read the interrupt cause register and r0, r0, r2 ; clear interrupts we've serviced str r0, [r1] ; write it back The problem here is if a transitory interrupt is received between the load and store, the write can clear it back to zero. There's nothing which can be done to get around that - which is why I'd prefer to do this as infrequently as necessary. > Is the datasheet for this stuff public available? Thankfully, it is, but like many such things, it'll leave you with /lots/ of questions. In the case of this register, the documentation only goes as far as describing the bits, but doesn't really describe their behaviour. Much of that can only come via experimentation with the hardware. :( > I don't think it matters in which order you process multiple pending > interrupts. Me neither - I'm just going to use fls() for no other reason that it produces more efficient code. My comments on that were to see whether I'd missed anything, and to stave off any review comments about why it's changed :) -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH] Revert "irqchip: irq-dove: Add PMU interrupt controller." Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 19:20:05 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20140305192005.GX21483@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw) In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1403051445020.18573@ionos.tec.linutronix.de> On Wed, Mar 05, 2014 at 03:42:34PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > This results in the RTC alarm test receiving exactly one interrupt for > > each alarm expiry, as it should do. Thoughts? > > You are worried about clearing an interrupt which is transitory and > not kept active at the device level until you handled it for real, > right? Yep. Let's take the code: ldr r0, [r1] ; read the interrupt cause register and r0, r0, r2 ; clear interrupts we've serviced str r0, [r1] ; write it back The problem here is if a transitory interrupt is received between the load and store, the write can clear it back to zero. There's nothing which can be done to get around that - which is why I'd prefer to do this as infrequently as necessary. > Is the datasheet for this stuff public available? Thankfully, it is, but like many such things, it'll leave you with /lots/ of questions. In the case of this register, the documentation only goes as far as describing the bits, but doesn't really describe their behaviour. Much of that can only come via experimentation with the hardware. :( > I don't think it matters in which order you process multiple pending > interrupts. Me neither - I'm just going to use fls() for no other reason that it produces more efficient code. My comments on that were to see whether I'd missed anything, and to stave off any review comments about why it's changed :) -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-05 19:20 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 68+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2013-12-01 17:29 [GIT PULL] irqchip: dove: drivers for v3.14 Jason Cooper 2013-12-11 17:50 ` Jason Cooper 2014-01-10 18:34 ` Jason Cooper 2014-01-28 17:35 ` Jason Cooper 2014-01-28 17:35 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-04 18:59 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-02-04 18:59 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-02-04 19:05 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-04 19:05 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-04 21:12 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-04 21:12 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-04 21:30 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-02-04 21:30 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-02-07 18:08 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-07 18:08 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-17 19:24 ` [RESEND PATCH] ARM: dove: dt: revert PMU interrupt controller node Jason Cooper 2014-02-17 19:24 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-17 19:32 ` [GIT PULL] irqchip: dove: drivers for v3.14 Jason Cooper 2014-02-17 19:32 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-18 20:51 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-02-18 20:51 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-02-19 15:18 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-19 15:18 ` Jason Cooper 2014-02-17 20:00 ` [PATCH V2] ARM: dove: dt: revert PMU interrupt controller node Jason Cooper 2014-02-17 20:00 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-03 15:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-03 15:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-03 17:37 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-03 17:37 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-03 18:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-03 18:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-03 22:24 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-03 22:24 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 3:08 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 3:08 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 5:32 ` [PATCH] Revert "irqchip: irq-dove: Add PMU interrupt controller." Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 5:32 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 10:13 ` [tip:irq/core] Revert irqchip: irq-dove: Add PMU interrupt controller tip-bot for Jason Cooper 2014-03-05 0:41 ` [PATCH] Revert "irqchip: irq-dove: Add PMU interrupt controller." Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-05 0:41 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-05 9:24 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-05 9:24 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-05 11:52 ` Carlo Caione 2014-03-05 11:52 ` Carlo Caione 2014-03-05 14:42 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-03-05 14:42 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-03-05 19:20 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message] 2014-03-05 19:20 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-05 21:36 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-03-05 21:36 ` Thomas Gleixner 2014-03-04 9:26 ` [PATCH V2] ARM: dove: dt: revert PMU interrupt controller node Andrew Lunn 2014-03-04 9:26 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-04 10:39 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth 2014-03-04 10:39 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth 2014-03-04 12:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-04 12:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-04 13:53 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 13:53 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 13:54 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-04 13:54 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-04 14:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-04 14:01 ` Russell King - ARM Linux 2014-03-04 14:41 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-04 14:41 ` Andrew Lunn 2014-03-04 14:02 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth 2014-03-04 14:02 ` Sebastian Hesselbarth 2014-03-04 14:18 ` Jason Cooper 2014-03-04 14:18 ` Jason Cooper
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20140305192005.GX21483@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \ --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \ --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \ --cc=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \ --cc=jason@lakedaemon.net \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=sebastian.hesselbarth@googlemail.com \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.