linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4 v6] i.MX31: dmaengine and framebuffer drivers

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:	Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:20:25 +0100
From:	"Hans J. Koch" <hjk@...utronix.de>
To:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fbdev-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, adaplas@...il.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4 v6] i.MX31: dmaengine and framebuffer drivers

On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 11:19:29AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 10:51:37AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Hi Sascha
> > 
> > On Tue, 6 Jan 2009, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Guennadi,
> > > 
> > > On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 06:11:13PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > This is version 6 of dmaengine and framebuffer drivers for i.MX31.
> > > > 
> > > > Changes since version 5: as requested by Sascha Hauer switched to dynamic 
> > > > IPU IRQ mapping.
> > > 
> > > I tried to express that it's really odd that you demux your _internal_
> > > interrupts as chained handlers.
> > 
> > Your last comment was:
> > 
> > > Preferably a way which does not involve introducing 100+ unused
> > > interrupts.
> > 
> > which I have done. Now we're back to demux / not demux...
> 
> Can *please* anybody else say something to this issue to calm this down?
> To make it easier for you please sign:
> 
> [ ] The code is fine the way it is. Sascha go home.
> [ ] The code could be better, but hey, it works and the world is not
>     perfect.
> [x] No, we shouldn't abuse chained interrupts for internal irq
>     dispatching.

Definitly the last one, for the reasons you gave in your last mail.
Using chained irqs is not the natural thing to do here.

Thanks,
Hans
--
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/