From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19234C10F14 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:46:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C4E20883 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:46:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=microchiptechnology.onmicrosoft.com header.i=@microchiptechnology.onmicrosoft.com header.b="RTidcFK7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726633AbfDHKq4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2019 06:46:56 -0400 Received: from esa2.microchip.iphmx.com ([68.232.149.84]:56073 "EHLO esa2.microchip.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726471AbfDHKq4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2019 06:46:56 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,325,1549954800"; d="scan'208";a="29661142" Received: from smtpout.microchip.com (HELO email.microchip.com) ([198.175.253.82]) by esa2.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 08 Apr 2019 03:46:54 -0700 Received: from NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.10.215.89) by email.microchip.com (10.10.76.106) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.352.0; Mon, 8 Apr 2019 03:46:54 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microchiptechnology.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-microchiptechnology-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=J3Pyv3nPnfkLnlxKtutK3/JEPBY+yx8ZrPPsNF5KhFc=; b=RTidcFK7PIvJ2XwtaNtqaB30gT9uWiZOqS5TUY+LTvM9vzXeBartRVbNtVBA835udVCNLQNeywDCpBoo72a0lqEGD2KWQTgFPRk3J5y5VmRR/rp26MAeuarOns/9As8xLY2aMKdQ9VazNd2jY/2pyU4b9I8KWTTIXOUAF8M/DZ0= Received: from BL0PR11MB3329.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.167.235.150) by BL0PR11MB3281.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.167.234.225) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1771.19; Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:46:52 +0000 Received: from BL0PR11MB3329.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::24e8:ee39:be6e:9336]) by BL0PR11MB3329.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::24e8:ee39:be6e:9336%2]) with mapi id 15.20.1771.021; Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:46:52 +0000 From: To: , CC: , , , , , Subject: RE: [PATCH] net: lan78xx: fix "enabled interrupts" warninig Thread-Topic: [PATCH] net: lan78xx: fix "enabled interrupts" warninig Thread-Index: AQHU7dHV0yp6Fa7I5USr12hPuITf3qYx3ZMggAALEoCAACApYA== Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 10:46:52 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20190408140301.3dcbccdd@xhacker.debian> <20190408155947.3efcb1eb@xhacker.debian> In-Reply-To: <20190408155947.3efcb1eb@xhacker.debian> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=RaghuramChary.Jallipalli@microchip.com; x-originating-ip: [118.185.82.6] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: c7441fdb-2f7c-44d4-4e9e-08d6bc0f82d8 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600139)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020);SRVR:BL0PR11MB3281; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BL0PR11MB3281: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-forefront-prvs: 0001227049 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10009020)(376002)(396003)(136003)(346002)(366004)(39860400002)(189003)(199004)(68736007)(7736002)(186003)(102836004)(26005)(6506007)(11346002)(446003)(305945005)(74316002)(76176011)(486006)(33656002)(52536014)(106356001)(110136005)(105586002)(476003)(55016002)(9686003)(54906003)(2906002)(6116002)(3846002)(6436002)(6246003)(53936002)(316002)(229853002)(5660300002)(4326008)(66066001)(7696005)(256004)(25786009)(72206003)(86362001)(14454004)(97736004)(71190400001)(71200400001)(4744005)(14444005)(8676002)(478600001)(81156014)(81166006)(8936002)(99286004);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;SCL:1;SRVR:BL0PR11MB3281;H:BL0PR11MB3329.namprd11.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;LANG:en;PTR:InfoNoRecords;MX:1;A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microchip.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: N96efMKdKtMn82l1Klig1FNdbho+0uU2yTxSyqkDGgBif35dnK0ujKd4EUxxaPcp+xUInTmF5HbFYOr0OLyNE4oxqKQdatiSPW5eQpLPBNFsztvky6186H1uoDzESS2E5t8kZExu0y+phWnAj+anA7Tw6lNM3BbNqfM6KqGckiOPieRhk8yiM0f6pZOpefsrLjDm5sfPUJGTHTV0RJArOwnHZHhC/PwyLDd0YHyPnM9hGQU8r/z1dYNaZyPyxDMzoTI7agOv42nEk1zj1oTTi5mfVk5LP81y7797/IOkxSYVqc260PLVk3EQUaH/HNLnDhH+dUA6O6yQykKIC1w1xPENLhln+Bba6bLqgbNExmTjmVdrjdARyKH2ofH163PVa5X/QnA5NXsu0wIQDV7loawncQCxZoBda/3jgKNummg= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: c7441fdb-2f7c-44d4-4e9e-08d6bc0f82d8 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 08 Apr 2019 10:46:52.3878 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 3f4057f3-b418-4d4e-ba84-d55b4e897d88 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BL0PR11MB3281 X-OriginatorOrg: microchip.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Is this warning specific to any linux version? >=20 > In theory, no. I only tested 5.0, 4.20, both can reproduce this warning. > This makes me think that code is fine because it occurs in 4.20 and greater= . Or maybe the problem is masked in older. I maybe wrong in assuming that.= =20 =20 >=20 > The warning comes from calling generic_handle_irq() in usb tasklet contex= t. > This is not correct. >=20 > Per my understanding, if there's chained irq, we could introduce extra > irqdomain. E.g >=20 > GIC <--> another irqchip controller <--> HW device >=20 Correct, IRQ domain is generally used in chained irq controllers. Yes, We need to check why irq domain is used in the current driver. Thanks