| Message ID | E1Qbqxi-0002FC-KX@rmk-PC.arm.linux.org.uk (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S index 1e5f387..fd42e66 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S @@ -234,8 +234,9 @@ __irq_svc: #endif ldr r4, [sp, #S_PSR] @ irqs are already disabled #ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS - tst r4, #PSR_I_BIT - bleq trace_hardirqs_on + @ The parent context IRQs must have been enabled to get here in + @ the first place, so there's no point checking the PSR I bit. + bl trace_hardirqs_on #endif svc_exit r4 @ return from exception UNWIND(.fnend )
There's no point checking to see whether IRQs were masked in the parent context when returning from IRQ handling - the fact that we're handling an IRQ means that the parent context must have had IRQs unmasked. Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk> --- arch/arm/kernel/entry-armv.S | 5 +++-- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)