linux-kernel - Re: Threaded irq handler question

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:	Thu, 22 Apr 2010 11:51:06 +0100
From:	Will Newton <will.newton@...il.com>
To:	Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@...driver.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: Threaded irq handler question

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 2:37 AM, Yong Zhang <yong.zhang@...driver.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 05:35:32PM +0100, Will Newton wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> My problem is that this structure does not work, because once I call
>> disable_irq_nosync() on the irq in the check handler the thread will
>> no longer run because the irq is disabled. However if I don't call
>> disable_irq_nosync() I will get endless irqs because the line is
>> level-triggered and will not be deasserted until the thread has run.
>>
>> Could someone tell me what I'm doing wrong here?
>
> Does IRQF_ONESHOT meet your need?

Almost I think, but I believe if my check handler does not wake the
thread then I don't get another interrupt ever. I can fix this by
making my check handler always return WAKE_THREAD, which is slightly
sub-optimal, but not a big problem.

Thank you for your help!
--
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/