| Message ID | 1392746158-10307-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
On 18 February 2014 09:55, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote: > Commit 40d225009ef accidentally changed the behaviour of > gic_acknowledge_irq() for the NVIC. The NVIC doesn't have SGIs, > so this meant we hit an assertion: > gic_acknowledge_irq: Assertion `s->sgi_pending[irq][cpu] != 0' failed. > > Return NVIC acknowledge-irq to its previous behaviour, like 11MPCore. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > --- > Oops. I think I mentioned that NVIC should behave like 11MPcore > in one of the rounds of code review, but then didn't spot that > this if() had been missed. We get the checks right elsewhere. > That was my bad entirely. Sorry for missing that one. > hw/intc/arm_gic.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/hw/intc/arm_gic.c b/hw/intc/arm_gic.c > index 93eaa6b..955b8d4 100644 > --- a/hw/intc/arm_gic.c > +++ b/hw/intc/arm_gic.c > @@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ uint32_t gic_acknowledge_irq(GICState *s, int cpu) > } > s->last_active[irq][cpu] = s->running_irq[cpu]; > > - if (s->revision == REV_11MPCORE) { > + if (s->revision == REV_11MPCORE || s->revision == REV_NVIC) { > /* Clear pending flags for both level and edge triggered interrupts. > * Level triggered IRQs will be reasserted once they become inactive. > */ > -- > 1.8.5 > Thanks for the fix. Reviewed-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
diff --git a/hw/intc/arm_gic.c b/hw/intc/arm_gic.c index 93eaa6b..955b8d4 100644 --- a/hw/intc/arm_gic.c +++ b/hw/intc/arm_gic.c @@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ uint32_t gic_acknowledge_irq(GICState *s, int cpu) } s->last_active[irq][cpu] = s->running_irq[cpu]; - if (s->revision == REV_11MPCORE) { + if (s->revision == REV_11MPCORE || s->revision == REV_NVIC) { /* Clear pending flags for both level and edge triggered interrupts. * Level triggered IRQs will be reasserted once they become inactive. */
Commit 40d225009ef accidentally changed the behaviour of gic_acknowledge_irq() for the NVIC. The NVIC doesn't have SGIs, so this meant we hit an assertion: gic_acknowledge_irq: Assertion `s->sgi_pending[irq][cpu] != 0' failed. Return NVIC acknowledge-irq to its previous behaviour, like 11MPCore. Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> --- Oops. I think I mentioned that NVIC should behave like 11MPcore in one of the rounds of code review, but then didn't spot that this if() had been missed. We get the checks right elsewhere. hw/intc/arm_gic.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)