Hi Thomas,
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On 19/09/16 10:12, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > On Mon, 19 Sep 2016, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> >> if (handle != handle_bad_irq && is_chained) {
>> >> + unsigned int type = irqd_get_trigger_type(&desc->irq_data);
>> >> +
>> >> /*
>> >> * We're about to start this interrupt immediately,
>> >> * hence the need to set the trigger configuration.
>> >> @@ -828,8 +830,10 @@ __irq_do_set_handler(struct irq_desc *desc,
>> >> irq_flow_handler_t handle,
>> >> * chained interrupt. Reset it immediately because we
>> >> * do know better.
>> >> */
>> >> - __irq_set_trigger(desc,
>> >> irqd_get_trigger_type(&desc->irq_data));
>> >> - desc->handle_irq = handle;
>> >> + if (type != IRQ_TYPE_NONE) {
>> >> + __irq_set_trigger(desc, type);
>> >> + desc->handle_irq = handle;
>> >
>> > Are you really sure that the handler should only be set when the trigger
>> > type is != NONE? I seriously doubt that this is correct.
>>
>> The handler has already been set outside of if() statement (at line
>> 819). Here, we only set it again if we've actually called
>> __irq_set_trigger() which could have changed it to something that takes
>> the type into account (handle_level_irq or handle_edge_irq, for example).
>
> Ah. I'll add a comment...
The comment is already there ;-)
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
