Thread (12 messages) 12 messages, 5 authors, 2013-11-12

[PATCH 0/2] genirq: arm64: perf: support for percpu pmu interrupt

From: Will Deacon <hidden>
Date: 2013-11-11 10:45:30
Also in: lkml

On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 01:04:23AM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 11/06/13 04:07, Vinayak Kale wrote:
quoted
This patch series adds support to handle interrupt registration/deregistration
in arm64 pmu driver when pmu interrupt type is percpu.

Patches in this patch series were previously sent out as separate patches [1].
This patch series incorporates comments/fixes suggested for original patches.

[1] 
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/205888.html
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-October/204414.html 

Vinayak Kale (2):
  genirq: error reporting in request_percpu_irq() and
    request_threaded_irq()
  arm64: perf: add support for percpu pmu interrupt

 arch/arm64/kernel/perf_event.c |  109 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 kernel/irq/manage.c            |   12 +++--
 2 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
What ever happened to the approach here[1]? It doesn't look very nice to
have to request the irq first as a per-cpu interrupt and then try as a
non-percpu interrupt when genirq already knows if its per-cpu or not.

[1] http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1207.3/02955.html
Hmm, I'd completely forgotten about that approach. Whilst it certainly looks
cleaner from a user perspective, I always get scared when I see
'desc->status_use_accessors' since it tends to incur the wrath of tglx :)

That said, I guess that should be fine in irqdesc.h (basically adding a new
accessor). Chris went missing after sending those initial patches, so
perhaps Vinayak could look at resurrecting those?

Will
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help