Hi,
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 11:40:18AM +0400, Denis Efremov wrote:
> The replacement of spin_lock_irq/spin_unlock_irq pair in
> twl4030_usb_linkstat function by
> spin_lock_irqsave/spin_lock_irqrestore pair.
> The twl4030_usb_linkstat function is called from twl4030_usb_irq
> interrupt handler. Therefore reenabling of handler interrupt line
> should be avoided.
>
> Found by Linux Driver Verification project (linuxtesting.org).
>
> Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov <[email protected]>
I have pushed a patch which I think solves this issue. Can you test ?
commit 6b03b13336ee5d8da7bda8799c9ed990e3daedcc
Author: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
Date: Thu Jun 14 13:24:42 2012 +0300
usb: otg: twl: add missing IRQF_ONESHOT
this patch fixes the following warning:
[ 2.825378] genirq: Threaded irq requested \
with handler=NULL and !ONESHOT for irq 363
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <[email protected]>
diff --git a/drivers/usb/otg/twl4030-usb.c b/drivers/usb/otg/twl4030-usb.c
index c4a86da..0297930 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/otg/twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/otg/twl4030-usb.c
@@ -651,8 +651,8 @@ static int __devinit twl4030_usb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
*/
twl->irq_enabled = true;
status = request_threaded_irq(twl->irq, NULL, twl4030_usb_irq,
- IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING,
- "twl4030_usb", twl);
+ IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING |
+ IRQF_ONESHOT, "twl4030_usb", twl);
if (status < 0) {
dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "can't get IRQ %d, err %d\n",
twl->irq, status);
--
balbi
On 09.08.2012 13:37, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have pushed a patch which I think solves this issue. Can you test ?
Hi,
my patch is unneeded since this is a threaded interrupt handler. And it
runs with
interrupt line masked globally on the controller(because of IRQF_ONESHOT).
And I think that "sti" instruction can't reenable this line because it
is cpu related.
The point was that if "local_irq_enable" is called in primary irq
handler or in
request_irq handler you reenables (maybe accidentally) interrupts on the
cpu.
Because after patch https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/3/25/434 these handlers
runs with
interrupts disabled.
Some time ago our static tool didn't make any difference between
ordinary and
threaded interrupts handlers. At that time I didn't know it and didn't
check the
code enough. So it was a false positive.