On Thu, 15 Sep 2016 18:32:00 +0530 Madhavan Srinivasan <ma...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Make it explicit the interrupt masking supported > by a gievn interrupt handler. Patch correspondingly > extends the MASKABLE_* macros with an addition's parameter. > "bitmask" parameter is passed to SOFTEN_TEST macro to decide > on masking the interrupt. > > Signed-off-by: Madhavan Srinivasan <ma...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h | 62 > ++++++++++++++++---------------- > arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64s.S | 36 ++++++++++++------- > 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h > index 1eea4ab75607..41be0c2d7658 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/exception-64s.h > @@ -179,9 +179,9 @@ END_FTR_SECTION_NESTED(ftr,ftr,943) > * checking of the interrupt maskable level in the SOFTEN_TEST. > * Intended to be used in MASKABLE_EXCPETION_* macros. > */ > -#define __EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1(area, extra, vec) > \ > +#define __EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1(area, extra, vec, bitmask) > \ > __EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1_PRE(area); \ > - extra(vec); \ > + extra(vec, bitmask); \ > __EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1_POST(area); > > /* Is __EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1 now for maskable exceptions, and EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1 for unmaskable? Does it make sense to rename __EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1 to MASKABLE_EXCEPTION_PROLOG_1? Reducing the mystery underscores in this file would be nice! This worked out nicely with mask bit being passed in by the exception handlers. Very neat. Reviewed-by: Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com>
