From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S965744AbcJYKp7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:45:59 -0400
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:44480 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S965691AbcJYKp6 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:45:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Disabling an interrupt in the handler locks the system up
To: Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>, Sebastian Frias <sf84@laposte.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
References: <580A4460.2090306@free.fr>
 <a79e2d2c-8ec8-744f-50fb-8c39216aa23e@arm.com> <580A60ED.3030307@free.fr>
 <20161021201448.3f4a0a7a@arm.com> <580A70B9.8060507@free.fr>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1610212147420.4855@nanos> <580A7A2B.5000702@free.fr>
 <20161022123713.6dc788b3@arm.com> <580BF1D4.2030509@free.fr>
 <580E3308.4050507@free.fr> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1610241847580.5002@nanos>
 <580F17E7.5060603@laposte.net> <580F1992.2070602@free.fr>
Cc: Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
Organization: ARM Ltd
Message-ID: <534c4588-f220-25a3-e7aa-84484f348bd1@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 11:45:55 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Icedove/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <580F1992.2070602@free.fr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 25/10/16 09:36, Mason wrote:
> On 25/10/2016 10:29, Sebastian Frias wrote:
> 
>> On 10/24/2016 06:55 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 24 Oct 2016, Mason wrote:
>>>
>>>> For the record, setting the IRQ_DISABLE_UNLAZY flag for this device
>>>> makes the system lock-up disappear.
>>>
>>> The way how lazy irq disabling works is:
>>>
>>> 1) Interrupt is marked disabled in software, but the hardware is not masked
>>>
>>> 2) If the interrupt fires befor the interrupt is reenabled, then it's
>>>    masked at the hardware level in the low level interrupt flow handler.
>>
>> Would you mind explaining what is the intention behind?
>> Because it does not seem obvious why there isn't a direct map between
>> "disable_irq*()" and "mask_irq()"
> 
> I had a similar, but slightly different question:
> 
> What is the difference between struct irq_chip's
> 
>  * @irq_shutdown:	shut down the interrupt (defaults to ->disable if NULL)
>  * @irq_disable:	disable the interrupt
>  * @irq_mask:		mask an interrupt source

One important difference between disable and mask is that disable is
perfectly allowed not to care about pending signals, whereas mask must
preserve an interrupt becoming pending whilst masked.

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...