mirror of
https://github.com/torvalds/linux.git
synced 2024-11-10 06:01:57 +00:00
i2c: core: Fix atomic xfer check for non-preempt config
Since commitaa49c90894
("i2c: core: Run atomic i2c xfer when !preemptible"), the whole reboot/power off sequence on non-preempt kernels is using atomic i2c xfer, as !preemptible() always results to 1. During device_shutdown(), the i2c might be used a lot and not all busses have implemented an atomic xfer handler. This results in a lot of avoidable noise, like: [ 12.687169] No atomic I2C transfer handler for 'i2c-0' [ 12.692313] WARNING: CPU: 6 PID: 275 at drivers/i2c/i2c-core.h:40 i2c_smbus_xfer+0x100/0x118 ... Fix this by allowing non-atomic xfer when the interrupts are enabled, as it was before. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231222230106.73f030a5@yea Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240102150350.3180741-1-mwalle@kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-i2c/13271b9b-4132-46ef-abf8-2c311967bb46@mailbox.org/ Fixes:aa49c90894
("i2c: core: Run atomic i2c xfer when !preemptible") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.2+ Signed-off-by: Benjamin Bara <benjamin.bara@skidata.com> Tested-by: Michael Walle <mwalle@kernel.org> Tested-by: Tor Vic <torvic9@mailbox.org> [wsa: removed a comment which needs more work, code is ok] Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
5cb23af389
commit
a3368e1186
@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
|
||||
* i2c-core.h - interfaces internal to the I2C framework
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
#include <linux/kconfig.h>
|
||||
#include <linux/rwsem.h>
|
||||
|
||||
struct i2c_devinfo {
|
||||
@ -29,7 +30,8 @@ int i2c_dev_irq_from_resources(const struct resource *resources,
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static inline bool i2c_in_atomic_xfer_mode(void)
|
||||
{
|
||||
return system_state > SYSTEM_RUNNING && !preemptible();
|
||||
return system_state > SYSTEM_RUNNING &&
|
||||
(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PREEMPT_COUNT) ? !preemptible() : irqs_disabled());
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static inline int __i2c_lock_bus_helper(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user