linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] mips irq cleanups

To: macro@linux-mips.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips irq cleanups
From: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 22:38:36 +0900 (JST)
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.64N.0611021134030.7700@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <20061102.020836.25912635.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <Pine.LNX.4.64N.0611021134030.7700@blysk.ds.pg.gda.pl>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Thu, 2 Nov 2006 11:39:12 +0000 (GMT), "Maciej W. Rozycki" 
<macro@linux-mips.org> wrote:
>  You have removed a couple of spinlocks protecting accesses to some 
> resources on the DECstation.  This makes me suspicious -- after all I put 
> all of them there for a reason, e.g. to make sure shadow variables are 
> consistent with write-only registers.  But perhaps you had a valid reason 
> to believe with your changes in place they are no needed anymore.  I'll 
> have a closer look as soon as possible and will let you know if the 
> changes are fine.  Thanks for your work.
> 
>  But for now it's a NAK for the DECstation part.

Thanks you your review.

Yes, I removed ioasic_lock and kn02_lock.  These were used in:

dec_kn02_be_init
enable_ioasic_irq
disable_ioasic_irq
ack_ioasic_irq
enable_kn02_irq
disable_kn02_irq
ack_kn02_irq
init_kn02_irqs

IIUC All of these are called interrupt disabled.  These callers are in
lowlevel interrupt context, or having irq_desc lock with
spin_lock_irqsave, or in early stage of bootstrap.  And DECstation is
not SMP system, so no further protection would be needed.

---
Atsushi Nemoto

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>