From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758244AbZDWP3T (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:29:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751294AbZDWP3F (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:29:05 -0400 Received: from mba.ocn.ne.jp ([122.1.235.107]:59751 "EHLO smtp.mba.ocn.ne.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751010AbZDWP3D (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:29:03 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:29:00 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <20090424.002900.11623503.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> To: alessandro.zummo@towertech.it Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hcegtvedt@atmel.com, vapier@gentoo.org, rongkai.zhan@windriver.com, balajirrao@openmoko.org, david-b@pacbell.net, broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: Make rtc_update_irq callable with irqs enabled From: Atsushi Nemoto In-Reply-To: <20090423170253.6b6dfd21@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <8bd0f97a0904230807q6c40436wa561d7b26db26cef@mail.gmail.com> <200904091627.15776.david-b@pacbell.net> References: <20090410005820.4fcfcc1f@i1501.lan.towertech.it> <20090423.235141.61509229.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20090423170253.6b6dfd21@i1501.lan.towertech.it> X-Fingerprint: 6ACA 1623 39BD 9A94 9B1A B746 CA77 FE94 2874 D52F X-Pgp-Public-Key: http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x2874D52F X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 21.4 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:02:53 +0200, Alessandro Zummo wrote: > As I said in my last email to Andrew, I think we can call > rtc_update_irq with irqs enabled and we don't probably need > any IRQF_ to request_irq . > > Are you willing to make some tests in that direction with your > drivers? Yes, if we had consensus of the API change. But since all my drivers have IRQF_DISABLED and I don't want to drop them, I'm not a good tester for this ;) On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 11:07:38 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > we just removed the shared bit from the Blackfin rtc driver because it > didnt really make sense for us. i need to test something else, so is > the only change you need is the one posted originally ? that makes > more sense to me than forcing everyone to use IRQF_DISABLED. My original patch should not be merged as is, as David said in other mail: On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 16:27:15 -0700, David Brownell wrote: > Any driver doing that right now is by definition buggy; that > function is clearly defined to need IRQs blocked: > > /** > * rtc_update_irq - report RTC periodic, alarm, and/or update irqs > * @rtc: the rtc device > * @num: how many irqs are being reported (usually one) > * @events: mask of RTC_IRQF with one or more of RTC_PF, RTC_AF, RTC_UF > * Context: in_interrupt(), irqs blocked > */ > > If you're going to change the interface, do it right... > update that kerneldoc and drivers like rtc-ds130[57], > rtc-ds1374, and rtc-test which do extra work to follow > the current interface spec. I agree on this. --- Atsushi Nemoto