Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp339344pxb; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 01:30:42 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyh0naduKwGyBg0fgJYcJ8zMj/KVgyP0Si8uHgrH2IShzmnJhi0QBirG5Xb8GsOmJhaDlWK X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:c296:: with SMTP id r22mr21579873ejz.158.1612863042236; Tue, 09 Feb 2021 01:30:42 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1612863042; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=CLtRdIU/kCj6QWJmO101UjaTpQKYEwebhO+Rl6jmziOqVzcfmhY0sbtYkWH6i4z0Ym Gr90STM+f1pnhHe0pTMKQApnBLrQvEPq8lKUA3W92jQb9/2MNKxdkScd0ijp3KKYkED1 jbe9VyS2+tpSBR9cfomoAOILQNTM5VKdqMQk7TbixLyYCsb2TmDCmphXWBb5uHmrCunk BZqRo4FvOAZXuOjMkAnGlmRy/25UcOMMBQxw2BadoEXybECREFYrfnzpV8g6VtjlPj6c HlBaM6N3VJ2oJa+xETMQINs+D9xJmDlQ8X89SjgRpAySnGUga2MYNuCSTf9J3r6KYWO+ PP5w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-language:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject; bh=hDEDinmStD139+81Yt9sN8EX/2IWzg7jS72ac4aGFFc=; b=mYrx9AlvExag/7Xst/AVrXpeqMpXVLCvo3H3I0OZRaFgZbVIarsP8FyO9LA0pV/5eA DcFwYDoWAo3Fc393u4Wd1DFIBm8pgaYEkoAywqc/FQOddtVJuB7/qKr3xYBTip1zAd4c jprU+Uv6JoCJ4IHr96pgWogLKWeLxR3LhseYI0ryvOgP9ga2R9IzkS8hZKD7dSzYY5Sd 0vCwkcjXVVtfpfTek7xgxNutKIHHQj2ZQNYnwqNlVq4SXnWLkMZ2DiJPK1MIfbu43jjF PccMG32Prr2kzftWWzGSY3GKI/y3EYNH76FQbMEyx/6xCLrCP0tYE6CNazeCEMthNjoG dDCg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o34si12707244eda.345.2021.02.09.01.30.17; Tue, 09 Feb 2021 01:30:42 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229939AbhBIJ3d (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 9 Feb 2021 04:29:33 -0500 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:12502 "EHLO szxga05-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229743AbhBIJZQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Feb 2021 04:25:16 -0500 Received: from DGGEMS403-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4DZcrC4QGHzjLQg; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:23:07 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.40.192.131) by DGGEMS403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:24:28 +0800 Subject: Re: [Linuxarm] [PATCH for next v1 0/2] gpio: few clean up patches to replace spin_lock_irqsave with spin_lock To: Andy Shevchenko CC: Linus Walleij , Andy Shevchenko , Grygorii Strashko , Santosh Shilimkar , "Kevin Hilman" , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , References: <1612774577-55943-1-git-send-email-luojiaxing@huawei.com> <2b8001bb-0bcd-3fea-e15c-2722e7243209@huawei.com> From: luojiaxing Message-ID: <1a5dfcf2-11a2-f549-782d-447d58e21305@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 17:24:28 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.40.192.131] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2021/2/8 21:28, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:11 AM luojiaxing wrote: >> Sorry, my operation error causes a patch missing from this patch set. I >> re-send the patch set. Please check the new one. > What is the new one?! You have to give proper versioning and change > log for your series. sure, I will send a new one later, but let me answer your question first. > >> On 2021/2/8 16:56, Luo Jiaxing wrote: >>> There is no need to use API with _irqsave in hard IRQ handler, So replace >>> those with spin_lock. > How do you know that another CPU in the system can't serve the > following interrupt from the hardware at the same time? Yes, I have some question before. There are some similar discussion here,  please take a look, Song baohua explained it more professionally. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e949a474a9284ac6951813bfc8b34945@hisilicon.com/ Here are some excerpts from the discussion: I think the code disabling irq in hardIRQ is simply wrong. Since this commit https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e58aa3d2d0cc genirq: Run irq handlers with interrupts disabled interrupt handlers are definitely running in a irq-disabled context unless irq handlers enable them explicitly in the handler to permit other interrupts. Thanks Jiaxing >