Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755953Ab1FNKFx (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:05:53 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:41118 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755908Ab1FNKFw (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Jun 2011 06:05:52 -0400 Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 12:05:50 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Manuel Lauss cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: chained irq handler problems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LFD 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1029 Lines: 22 On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, Manuel Lauss wrote: > My question is: what are the differences in interrupt handling between the > "traditional" handler and the cascade handler case? > I also noticed that the cascade irq (the muxer irq line to the cpu) is not > disabled when the interrupt is serviced. Is this by design? The normal handler, which should btw never ever be setup from an startup callback, deals with the irq chip functions (mask, ack, eoi) which are assigned to that irq line. The chained handler is called directly from the low level entry code and bypasses the standard handling mechanism. That means no chip functions are called. If your irq chip of the primary line requires e.g. an ack, then this needs to be done explicitely in the chained handler itself. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/