Re: [PATCH 2/6] brcmfmac: Handling the interrupt in ISR directlyfor non-OOB

[Stephen Warren]

On 08/27/2012 09:24 AM, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 08/27/2012 12:25 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
>> In case of inband interrupts, if we handle the interrupt in dpc thread,
>> two level of thread switching takes place to process wifi interrupts.
>> One in SDHCI driver and the other in Wifi driver. This may cause the
>> system
>> instability.
> 
> Looking into the sdhci/mmc code indeed shows that the brcmfmac irq
> handler is not called in true IRQ context. So the dpc thread may add
> unnecessary complexity, but to me there is not indication that there is
> a stability issue.
> 
>> Because the SDHCI calls sdio_irq_thread() to handle the irq, this
>> thread locks
>> mmc host and calls wifi handler. It expects WiFi handler to be quick and
>> enables sdio interrupt from card at end. If wifi handler defers this
>> work for
>> a different thread, sdio_irq_thread() will be stuck on next wifi
>> interrupt
>> since mmc lock is not freed.
> 
> Not sure if I can follow this explanation. The isr is called with host
> claimed (by sdio_irq_thread) and all it does is at a linked list member
> and signal the dpc thread. After doing this the host is released.

Is the issue something like the ISR handler or first level of threading
does:

* Trigger DPC
* Re-enable interrupt

So that the interrupt then fires again before the triggered DPC can run
to handle/clear it, thus causing an interrupt storm?

Whereas handling the interrupt directly prevents this race condition?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/