On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Jan Kiszka wrote:

> Am 14.12.2010 22:46, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Dec 2010, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com>
> >>    chip_bus_lock(desc);
> >>    retval = __setup_irq(irq, desc, action);
> >>    chip_bus_sync_unlock(desc);
> >>  
> >> -  if (retval)
> >> +  if (retval) {
> >> +          if (desc->action && !desc->action->next)
> >> +                  desc->irq_data.drv_status &= ~IRQS_SHARED;
> > 
> > This is redundant. IRQS_SHARED gets set in a code path where all
> > checks are done already.
> 
> Nope, it's also set before entry of __setup_irq in case we call an
> IRQF_ADAPTIVE handler.
> 
> We need to set it that early as we may race with IRQ events for the
> already registered handler happening between the sharing notification
> and the actual registration of the second handler.

Hmm, ok. Though the MAKE_SHAREABLE flag should be sufficient to do the
notification.

Thanks,

        tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to