[RESEND] riscv: Fix local irq restore when flags indicates irq disabled

  When arch_local_irq_restore() is called with flags indicating irqs
disabled, we need to clear SR_IE bit in CSR_STATUS, whereas current
implementation based on csr_set() function only sets SR_IE bit of
CSR_STATUS when SR_IE bit of flags is high and does nothing when
SR_IE bit of flags is low.

This commit supplies csr clear operation when calling irq restore
function with flags indicating irq disabled.

Fixes: 6d60b6ee0c97 ("RISC-V: Device, timer, IRQs, and the SBI")
Signed-off-by: Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@bytedance.com>
---
 arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h | 5 ++++-
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
  

Hey,

On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 09:28:18PM +0800, Xu Lu wrote:
> When arch_local_irq_restore() is called with flags indicating irqs
> disabled, we need to clear SR_IE bit in CSR_STATUS, whereas current
> implementation based on csr_set() function only sets SR_IE bit of
> CSR_STATUS when SR_IE bit of flags is high and does nothing when
> SR_IE bit of flags is low.
> 
> This commit supplies csr clear operation when calling irq restore
> function with flags indicating irq disabled.
> 
> Fixes: 6d60b6ee0c97 ("RISC-V: Device, timer, IRQs, and the SBI")
> Signed-off-by: Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@bytedance.com>
> ---

There's no changelog or explanation, so what is the reason for the
resend?

Cheers,
Conor.

>  arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h
> index 08d4d6a5b7e9..7c31fc3c3559 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h
> @@ -49,7 +49,10 @@ static inline int arch_irqs_disabled(void)
>  /* set interrupt enabled status */
>  static inline void arch_local_irq_restore(unsigned long flags)
>  {
> -	csr_set(CSR_STATUS, flags & SR_IE);
> +	if (flags & SR_IE)
> +		csr_set(CSR_STATUS, SR_IE);
> +	else
> +		csr_clear(CSR_STATUS, SR_IE);
>  }
>  
>  #endif /* _ASM_RISCV_IRQFLAGS_H */
> -- 
> 2.20.1
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
  

On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 10:36 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 09:28:18PM +0800, Xu Lu wrote:
> > When arch_local_irq_restore() is called with flags indicating irqs
> > disabled, we need to clear SR_IE bit in CSR_STATUS, whereas current
> > implementation based on csr_set() function only sets SR_IE bit of
> > CSR_STATUS when SR_IE bit of flags is high and does nothing when
> > SR_IE bit of flags is low.
> >
> > This commit supplies csr clear operation when calling irq restore
> > function with flags indicating irq disabled.
> >
> > Fixes: 6d60b6ee0c97 ("RISC-V: Device, timer, IRQs, and the SBI")
> > Signed-off-by: Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@bytedance.com>
> > ---
>
> There's no changelog or explanation, so what is the reason for the
> resend?
>
> Cheers,
> Conor.

Sorry for disturbing you.

I haven't received any response since the patch was sent last week. I
think maintainers are busy and thus I want to have a ping. This patch
was resent because I found it is said that resending patch is one of
the methods to ping maintainers in this kernel doc:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html.

> >  arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h | 5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h
> > index 08d4d6a5b7e9..7c31fc3c3559 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/irqflags.h
> > @@ -49,7 +49,10 @@ static inline int arch_irqs_disabled(void)
> >  /* set interrupt enabled status */
> >  static inline void arch_local_irq_restore(unsigned long flags)
> >  {
> > -     csr_set(CSR_STATUS, flags & SR_IE);
> > +     if (flags & SR_IE)
> > +             csr_set(CSR_STATUS, SR_IE);
> > +     else
> > +             csr_clear(CSR_STATUS, SR_IE);
> >  }
> >
> >  #endif /* _ASM_RISCV_IRQFLAGS_H */
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-riscv mailing list
> > linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
  

On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 11:20:53PM +0800, 旭路 wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 10:36 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hey,
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 09:28:18PM +0800, Xu Lu wrote:
> > > When arch_local_irq_restore() is called with flags indicating irqs
> > > disabled, we need to clear SR_IE bit in CSR_STATUS, whereas current
> > > implementation based on csr_set() function only sets SR_IE bit of
> > > CSR_STATUS when SR_IE bit of flags is high and does nothing when
> > > SR_IE bit of flags is low.
> > >
> > > This commit supplies csr clear operation when calling irq restore
> > > function with flags indicating irq disabled.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 6d60b6ee0c97 ("RISC-V: Device, timer, IRQs, and the SBI")
> > > Signed-off-by: Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@bytedance.com>
> > > ---
> >
> > There's no changelog or explanation, so what is the reason for the
> > resend?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Conor.
> 
> Sorry for disturbing you.

Nah, tis fine.

> I haven't received any response since the patch was sent last week. I
> think maintainers are busy and thus I want to have a ping. This patch
> was resent because I found it is said that resending patch is one of
> the methods to ping maintainers in this kernel doc:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html.

Right, resending is a valid way to do that - but leaving a comment about
why you are resending under the --- line is advised so that people know
why it is that you are resending.

Thanks,
Conor.
  

On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 11:24 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 11:20:53PM +0800, 旭路 wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 10:36 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 09:28:18PM +0800, Xu Lu wrote:
> > > > When arch_local_irq_restore() is called with flags indicating irqs
> > > > disabled, we need to clear SR_IE bit in CSR_STATUS, whereas current
> > > > implementation based on csr_set() function only sets SR_IE bit of
> > > > CSR_STATUS when SR_IE bit of flags is high and does nothing when
> > > > SR_IE bit of flags is low.
> > > >
> > > > This commit supplies csr clear operation when calling irq restore
> > > > function with flags indicating irq disabled.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 6d60b6ee0c97 ("RISC-V: Device, timer, IRQs, and the SBI")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Xu Lu <luxu.kernel@bytedance.com>
> > > > ---
> > >
> > > There's no changelog or explanation, so what is the reason for the
> > > resend?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Conor.
> >
> > Sorry for disturbing you.
>
> Nah, tis fine.
>
> > I haven't received any response since the patch was sent last week. I
> > think maintainers are busy and thus I want to have a ping. This patch
> > was resent because I found it is said that resending patch is one of
> > the methods to ping maintainers in this kernel doc:
> > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html.
>
> Right, resending is a valid way to do that - but leaving a comment about
> why you are resending under the --- line is advised so that people know
> why it is that you are resending.
>
> Thanks,
> Conor.

Got that. Thanks very much.