Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 6 Dec 2018 12:05:28 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Rafael David Tinoco <rafael.tinoco@linaro.org>
Cc:     Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        rui.zhang@intel.com, edubezval@gmail.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: v4.14 fix for Hikey 960 unbalanced IRQ enablement
Message-ID: <20181206110528.GM19891@kroah.com>
References: <20181203133107.4002-1-rafael.tinoco@linaro.org>
 <20181203141442.GA19335@kroah.com>
 <dc468512-7a73-3d69-fe9e-d660db85ee5b@linaro.org>
 <20181203151946.GG235790@sasha-vm>
 <20181203180521.GA15996@kroah.com>
 <e0eb7f46-e619-7198-eb78-2b55246b1159@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <e0eb7f46-e619-7198-eb78-2b55246b1159@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 04:24:48PM -0200, Rafael David Tinoco wrote:
> >> Greg,
> >>
> >> Patch 5 in this series seems to explain the best what is happening here:
> >>
> >>> With the following changes, we fix all in one:
> >>>
> >>> - Do the setup, one time, at probe time
> >>>
> >>> - Add the IRQF_ONESHOT, ack the interrupt in the threaded handler
> >>>
> >>> - Remove the interrupt handler
> >>>
> >>> - Set the correct value for the LAG register
> >>>
> >>> - Remove all the irq_enabled stuff in the code as the interruption
> >>>   handling is fixed
> >>>
> >>> - Remove the 3ms delay
> >>>
> >>> - Reorder the initialization routine to be in the right order
> >>
> >> We can't revert anything because the breakage was there since the driver
> >> was introduced.
> > 
> > So the driver was broken in 4.14, why not just use 4.19 instead?  This
> > isn't a 4.14 regression, it's something that obviously no one has
> > noticed for a year now, so why backport these big patches to 4.14 now?
> > 
> > thanks,
> > 
> > greg k-h
> > 
> 
> This was caught during our functional tests. No direct complains, but,
> since it included a trace, and there was a fix for it, I thought it
> could be accepted for upstream v4.14 (it is included in other v4.14
> kernels, like Android's).

Ok, all now queued up, thanks.

greg k-h