The code has been in a irq-disabled context since it is hard IRQ. There
is no necessity to do it again.
Signed-off-by: Tian Tao <[email protected]>
---
drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
index 5c2a13b..6ae757d 100644
--- a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
+++ b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
@@ -409,16 +409,15 @@ static irqreturn_t rcar_thermal_irq(int irq, void *data)
{
struct rcar_thermal_common *common = data;
struct rcar_thermal_priv *priv;
- unsigned long flags;
u32 status, mask;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&common->lock, flags);
+ spin_lock(&common->lock);
mask = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, INTMSK);
status = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, STR);
rcar_thermal_common_write(common, STR, 0x000F0F0F & mask);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock(&common->lock);
status = status & ~mask;
--
2.7.4
Hi Tian,
Thanks for your work.
On 2020-10-21 11:05:30 +0800, Tian Tao wrote:
> The code has been in a irq-disabled context since it is hard IRQ. There
> is no necessity to do it again.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tian Tao <[email protected]>
Tested-by: Niklas S?derlund <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> index 5c2a13b..6ae757d 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> @@ -409,16 +409,15 @@ static irqreturn_t rcar_thermal_irq(int irq, void *data)
> {
> struct rcar_thermal_common *common = data;
> struct rcar_thermal_priv *priv;
> - unsigned long flags;
> u32 status, mask;
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&common->lock, flags);
> + spin_lock(&common->lock);
>
> mask = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, INTMSK);
> status = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, STR);
> rcar_thermal_common_write(common, STR, 0x000F0F0F & mask);
>
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->lock, flags);
> + spin_unlock(&common->lock);
>
> status = status & ~mask;
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
--
Regards,
Niklas S?derlund
Hi Tian,
CC tglx
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 2:15 PM Tian Tao <[email protected]> wrote:
> The code has been in a irq-disabled context since it is hard IRQ. There
> is no necessity to do it again.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tian Tao <[email protected]>
Thanks for your patch!
Is this also true if CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT=y, and all irq handlers execute
in the context of special tasks?
> --- a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> @@ -409,16 +409,15 @@ static irqreturn_t rcar_thermal_irq(int irq, void *data)
> {
> struct rcar_thermal_common *common = data;
> struct rcar_thermal_priv *priv;
> - unsigned long flags;
> u32 status, mask;
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&common->lock, flags);
> + spin_lock(&common->lock);
>
> mask = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, INTMSK);
> status = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, STR);
> rcar_thermal_common_write(common, STR, 0x000F0F0F & mask);
>
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->lock, flags);
> + spin_unlock(&common->lock);
>
> status = status & ~mask;
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
On Thu, Oct 22 2020 at 14:51, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 2:15 PM Tian Tao <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The code has been in a irq-disabled context since it is hard IRQ. There
>> is no necessity to do it again.
>>
> Is this also true if CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT=y, and all irq handlers execute
> in the context of special tasks?
On RT or even on mainline with 'threadirqs' on the command line all
interrupts which are not explicitly requested with IRQF_NO_THREAD run
their handlers in thread context. The same applies to soft interrupts.
That means they are subject to the normal scheduler rules and no other
code is going to acquire that lock from hard interrupt context either,
so the irqsave() here is pointless in all cases.
Famous last words...
... unless the driver does magic things like having a hrtimer armed
which expires in hard interrupt context and touches the very same
lock, but that's not the case in this particular driver.
So the change itself is correct, but the change log could do with some
polishing. :)
Thanks,
tglx
On 21/10/2020 05:05, Tian Tao wrote:
> The code has been in a irq-disabled context since it is hard IRQ. There
> is no necessity to do it again.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tian Tao <[email protected]>
> ---
Whe resending with the log improved, please fix the subject:
thermal: rcar: Replace ...
Thanks
-- Daniel
> drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> index 5c2a13b..6ae757d 100644
> --- a/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> +++ b/drivers/thermal/rcar_thermal.c
> @@ -409,16 +409,15 @@ static irqreturn_t rcar_thermal_irq(int irq, void *data)
> {
> struct rcar_thermal_common *common = data;
> struct rcar_thermal_priv *priv;
> - unsigned long flags;
> u32 status, mask;
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&common->lock, flags);
> + spin_lock(&common->lock);
>
> mask = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, INTMSK);
> status = rcar_thermal_common_read(common, STR);
> rcar_thermal_common_write(common, STR, 0x000F0F0F & mask);
>
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&common->lock, flags);
> + spin_unlock(&common->lock);
>
> status = status & ~mask;
>
>
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog