[ARM] gic: Fix gic cascade irq handling

No need for the cascade irq function to have a "fastcall" annotation.
Fix the range checking for valid IRQ numbers - comparing the value
returned by the GIC with NR_IRQS is meaningless since we translate
the GIC irq number to a Linux IRQ number afterwards.

Check the GIC returned IRQ number is within limits first, then add
the IRQ offset, and only then compare with NR_IRQS.

Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>
This commit is contained in:
Russell King 2007-05-17 10:11:34 +01:00 committed by Russell King
parent f3270f6ef7
commit 0f347bb913
1 changed files with 9 additions and 11 deletions

View File

@ -125,12 +125,11 @@ static void gic_set_cpu(unsigned int irq, cpumask_t mask_val)
}
#endif
static void fastcall gic_handle_cascade_irq(unsigned int irq,
struct irq_desc *desc)
static void gic_handle_cascade_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc)
{
struct gic_chip_data *chip_data = get_irq_data(irq);
struct irq_chip *chip = get_irq_chip(irq);
unsigned int cascade_irq;
unsigned int cascade_irq, gic_irq;
unsigned long status;
/* primary controller ack'ing */
@ -140,16 +139,15 @@ static void fastcall gic_handle_cascade_irq(unsigned int irq,
status = readl(chip_data->cpu_base + GIC_CPU_INTACK);
spin_unlock(&irq_controller_lock);
cascade_irq = (status & 0x3ff);
if (cascade_irq > 1020)
gic_irq = (status & 0x3ff);
if (gic_irq == 1023)
goto out;
if (cascade_irq < 32 || cascade_irq >= NR_IRQS) {
do_bad_IRQ(cascade_irq, desc);
goto out;
}
cascade_irq += chip_data->irq_offset;
generic_handle_irq(cascade_irq);
cascade_irq = gic_irq + chip_data->irq_offset;
if (unlikely(gic_irq < 32 || gic_irq > 1020 || cascade_irq >= NR_IRQS))
do_bad_IRQ(cascade_irq, desc);
else
generic_handle_irq(cascade_irq);
out:
/* primary controller unmasking */