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 S1752014AbdGYN0s convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 25 Jul 2017 09:26:48 -0400
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-107.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.107]:22772 "EHLO
        us-smtp-delivery-107.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750839AbdGYN0r (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 25 Jul 2017 09:26:47 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] irqchip/tango: Don't use incorrect irq_mask_ack
 callback
To: Mans Rullgard <mans@mansr.com>, Doug Berger <opendmb@gmail.com>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Mason <slash.tmp@free.fr>
References: <20170719190734.18566-1-opendmb@gmail.com>
 <20170719190734.18566-3-opendmb@gmail.com>
 <7a51555f-8191-9ebd-1f30-7c20f6db9d3f@sigmadesigns.com>
 <8d29fec9-35b8-c33b-3091-3e9a51c99ed7@gmail.com>
 <dddc01e3-b4f0-1f94-db6a-e3d4b31e6f4d@sigmadesigns.com>
 <yw1xfudkodvv.fsf@mansr.com>
From: Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@sigmadesigns.com>
Message-ID: <6f0092f7-692f-4a15-1d95-40f4e59c8585@sigmadesigns.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 15:26:40 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/52.0 SeaMonkey/2.49.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <yw1xfudkodvv.fsf@mansr.com>
X-Originating-IP: [172.27.0.114]
X-MC-Unique: z0vAMVgiPSuVxW7k0tn06w-1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 25/07/2017 15:16, Måns Rullgård wrote:

> What happened to the patch adding the proper combined function?

It appears you're not CCed on v2.

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9859799/

Doug wrote:
> Yes, you understand correctly.  The irq_mask_ack method is entirely
> optional and I assume that is why this issue went undetected for so
> long; however, it is slightly more efficient to combine the functions
> (even if the ack is unnecessary) which is why I chose to do so for my
> changes to the irqchip-brcmstb-l2 driver where I first discovered this
> issue.  How much value the improved efficiency has is certainly
> debatable, but interrupt handling is one area where people might care
> about such a small difference.  As the irqchip-tango driver maintainer
> you are welcome to decide whether or not the irq_mask_ack method makes
> sense to you.

My preference goes to leaving the irq_mask_ack callback undefined,
and let the irqchip framework use irq_mask and irq_ack instead.

Regards.