linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/8] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver

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, 1 Mar 2011 12:43:33 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] Add a mfd IPUv3 driver

On Tuesday 01 March 2011, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > Taking one step back from this, have you considered making this
> > a regular interrupt controller? That would make the client drivers
> > more standard -- you could define the interrupt numbers as resources
> > of a platform device or in the device tree, for instance.
> > The cost might be more complex code, e.g. when a device requires
> > many interrupts, but I think it will be at least as efficient
> > at run-time, and less surprising for readers and authors of
> > client drivers.
> 
> I thought about this, but hesitated to increase NR_IRQS by 463. Do you
> think we should do this instead?

I think there is a plan to virtualize the interrupt numbers on ARM,
and in that case NR_IRQS becomes rather meaningless. I don't know
exactly how far that effort has come.

	Arnd
--
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/