Re: [PATCH 1/1] 8250_kgdb driver reworked
From: Alan Cox (alan_at_lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: 09/01/05
- Previous message: Rick Warner: "latency doubled on tg3 device from 2.6.11 to 2.6.12"
- In reply to: Tom Rini: "[PATCH 1/1] 8250_kgdb driver reworked"
- Next in thread: Tom Rini: "Re: [PATCH 1/1] 8250_kgdb driver reworked"
- Reply: Tom Rini: "Re: [PATCH 1/1] 8250_kgdb driver reworked"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Tom Rini <trini@kernel.crashing.org> Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 22:57:54 +0100
> +static irqreturn_t
> +kgdb8250_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + char iir;
> +
> + if (irq != KGDB8250_IRQ)
> + return IRQ_NONE;
How can this occur - you gave the IRQ number in the register_irq. WHy
test for it, and if it occurs why not BUG()
> + /*
> + * If there is some other CPU in KGDB then this is a
> + * spurious interrupt. so return without even checking a byte
> + */
> + if (atomic_read(&debugger_active))
> + return IRQ_NONE;
> +
Shared IRQ -> hung box.
Also lose the ugly confusing macros like CURRENTPORT please to follow
kernel style better. In fact why not keep a pointer to the 'current'
uart to get tighter code too ?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Rick Warner: "latency doubled on tg3 device from 2.6.11 to 2.6.12"
- In reply to: Tom Rini: "[PATCH 1/1] 8250_kgdb driver reworked"
- Next in thread: Tom Rini: "Re: [PATCH 1/1] 8250_kgdb driver reworked"
- Reply: Tom Rini: "Re: [PATCH 1/1] 8250_kgdb driver reworked"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
