From: Esben Haabendal on 7 Jun 2010 17:30
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx(a)linutronix.de> wrote:
> Maybe you understand now, why I was pretty sure upfront, that your
> approach was wrong even without knowing all the gory details ? :)
I understand. There is a better solution, which is to use threaded
interrupts where needed.
But I must confess that I am disappointed that you still fail to see
how the pca953x
patch actually eliminates the need for serialization. But I don't
think there is much
point in going on about that.
The phy driver should be rewritten to use a threaded handler, it will
solve my particular problem.
And in the meantime, I have been promised to get the phy interrupts ofloaded
to real CPU interrupt lines :-)
Oh, I still think that the disable_irq_nosync documentaiton is misleading.
Functions that are allowed in a particular context should not call functions
that are not allowed to be called in that context. But now I know :-)
Esben Haabendal, Senior Software Consultant
Dor�Development ApS, Ved Stranden 1, 9560 Hadsund, DK-Denmark
Phone: +45 51 92 53 93, E-mail: eha(a)doredevelopment.dk
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
First | Prev |
Pages: 1 2
Next: irq: support IRQ_NESTED_THREAD with non-threaded interrupt handlers