@@ -1167,6 +1167,8 @@ static int
if (desc->irq_data.chip->flags & IRQCHIP_ONESHOT_SAFE)
new->flags &= ~IRQF_ONESHOT;
+ chip_bus_lock(desc);
+
/*
* The following block of code has to be executed atomically
*/
@@ -1347,6 +1349,7 @@ static int
}
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
+ chip_bus_sync_unlock(desc);
irq_setup_timings(desc, new);
@@ -1378,6 +1381,8 @@ static int
out_unlock:
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&desc->lock, flags);
+ chip_bus_sync_unlock(desc);
+
out_thread:
if (new->thread) {
struct task_struct *t = new->thread;
@@ -1417,9 +1422,7 @@ int setup_irq(unsigned int irq, struct i
if (retval < 0)
return retval;
- chip_bus_lock(desc);
retval = __setup_irq(irq, desc, act);
- chip_bus_sync_unlock(desc);
if (retval)
irq_chip_pm_put(&desc->irq_data);
@@ -1674,9 +1677,7 @@ int request_threaded_irq(unsigned int ir
return retval;
}
- chip_bus_lock(desc);
retval = __setup_irq(irq, desc, action);
- chip_bus_sync_unlock(desc);
if (retval) {
irq_chip_pm_put(&desc->irq_data);
@@ -1924,9 +1925,7 @@ int setup_percpu_irq(unsigned int irq, s
if (retval < 0)
return retval;
- chip_bus_lock(desc);
retval = __setup_irq(irq, desc, act);
- chip_bus_sync_unlock(desc);
if (retval)
irq_chip_pm_put(&desc->irq_data);
@@ -1980,9 +1979,7 @@ int request_percpu_irq(unsigned int irq,
return retval;
}
- chip_bus_lock(desc);
retval = __setup_irq(irq, desc, action);
- chip_bus_sync_unlock(desc);
if (retval) {
irq_chip_pm_put(&desc->irq_data);
There is no point in having the irq_bus_lock() protection around all callers to __setup_irq(). Move it into __setup_irq(). This is also a preparatory patch for addressing the issues with the irq resource callbacks. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> --- kernel/irq/manage.c | 13 +++++-------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html