On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 4:14 PM, Will Deacon [off-list ref] wrote:

On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 at 01:04:23AM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

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?

Okay, in next patch revision I will use that approach.