On Thu, 1 Oct 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Oct 2015, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > Now if I plug/unplug the card I may get few interrupts to CPU0 but rest
> > of the interrupts never happen. Probably because IO-APIC forwards them
> > to the lowest priority CPU which is offline at this point.
> >
> > There is following check in fixup_irqs():
> >
> > if (!irq_has_action(irq) || irqd_is_per_cpu(data) ||
> > cpumask_subset(affinity, cpu_online_mask)) {
> > raw_spin_unlock(&desc->lock);
> > continue;
> > }
> >
> > If an interrupt is requested by a driver it will force new affinity and
> > everything works fine. However if the interrupt is chained (it does not
> > have ->action) this is skipped and the current affinity remains.
> >
> > We could detect here if the interrupt is chained but there seems to be
> > no easy way to determine it currently so we would need to add a new flag
> > to desc->status_use_accessors that gets set in __irq_do_set_handler()
> > when is_chained is 1.
>
> Either there or in irq_data. Need to look at it in detail.
desc->status_use_accessors is the place where this wants to go.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
