Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 2 Jan 2007 19:36:20 +0100
From:      Olivier Houchard <cognet@ci0.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: PERFORCE change 112424 for review
Message-ID:  <20070102183620.GA93436@ci0.org>
In-Reply-To: <200701021301.26644.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <200701021653.l02GrTiC007919@repoman.freebsd.org> <200701021220.09987.jhb@freebsd.org> <20070102174011.GA93081@ci0.org> <200701021301.26644.jhb@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 01:01:26PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 January 2007 12:40, Olivier Houchard wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 12:20:09PM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 02 January 2007 11:53, Olivier Houchard wrote:
> > > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=112424
> > > > 
> > > > Change 112424 by cognet@hulglah on 2007/01/02 16:52:32
> > > > 
> > > > 	Implement a minimalist intr_eoi_src which just calls arm_unmask_irq(),
> > > > 	so that irq are unmasked after a filter+ithread runs.
> > > 
> > > Err, you shouldn't need to mask the IRQ unless you schedule the ithread.   Hmm,
> > > I'd also prefer it if we didn't pass function handlers to mi_handle_intr() (which
> > > should be intr_handle() or something, all the MI interrupt code is intr_foo(),
> > > not mi_foo_intr()) but instead set them in the intr_event and passed them to
> > > intr_event_create().
> > 
> > Basically the problem is arm_execute_handlers() can't know if we're talking
> > about an interrupt for which we had a filter, and so we don't have to mask it,
> > or an interrupt for which we have to schedule the ithread. So it has to be
> > always masked.
> 
> Err, no, it shouldn't. :)  mi_handle_intr() will use a different callback for the
> different cases.  It should call the disable_and_eoi() hook if the interrupt should
> be masked, and it should just call teh eoi() hook if the interrupt just needs to be
> eoi'd but not disabled (because a filter claimed it).
> 


Oops you're right of course. Just making disab masking the interrupt, and not
doing so by default should work fine.

Olivier



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070102183620.GA93436>