Re: [PATCH] genirq: warn about IRQF_SHARED|IRQF_DISABLED at theright place

[Uwe Kleine-König]

On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:21:30PM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Monday 30 November 2009, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > +               if (new->flags & IRQF_DISABLED)
> > +                       pr_warning("IRQ %d/%s: IRQF_DISABLED is not guaranteed "
> > +                                       "on shared IRQs\n", irq, new->name);
> 
> This should have copied the original test ... this way,
> it's dropping the SHARED constraint, and trying to morph
> into a generic "IRQF_DISABLED is eeebil!" test.
No, it doesn't.  The inserted code is in an if block:

	old_ptr = &desc->action;
	old = *old_ptr;
	if (old) {
		/* ... */
		if (!((old->flags & new->flags) & IRQF_SHARED) ||
			((old->flags ^ new->flags) & IRQF_TRIGGER_MASK)) {
			old_name = old->name;
			goto mismatch;
		}

		...

+		if (new->flags & IRQF_DISABLED)
+			pr_warning("...");

and the mismatch label is further below.  So the warning is still only
hit if a shared irq is registered.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                              | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                    | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/