linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] irq-remove: core

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:50:11 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] irq-remove: core

Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> writes:
>
> Do you think set_irqfunc_irq() should be called at all the callsites of
> set_irq_regs(), or one the fix you mention is applied, do you think current
> model is sufficient?

Good question.  At first glance I think the call sites are ok, that
is where we have the information now.  Non-genirq architectures needs
work of course.

However given the weird poll case etc that either we need to take this
slow and delay this change until all of the drivers are fixed up, to
not need an irq parameter (as you suggested).  Or that we need to 
allow both forms of irq handler to coexist temporarily.

Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/