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, 14 Nov 2014 09:39:16 +0800
From:	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Yijing Wang <wangyijing@...wei.com>
CC:	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Yingjoe Chen <yingjoe.chen@...iatek.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch V1 0/6] Refine generic/PCI MSI irqodmian interfaces

On 2014/11/14 9:31, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Yijing Wang wrote:
> 
> Could you please use a mail client which does proper line wraps or
> configure yours to do so?
> 
>> Associate the irq domain and PCI bus is not necessary, because all
>> PCI buses under same host bridge always share same MSI chip/irq
>> domain, we only need associate them and pci host bridge.
>>
>> I'm refactoring the pci_host_bridge, make it be a generic one, rip
>> out of the pci root bus creation, so we could put the irq domain and
>> pci domain etc.. in it. Finally, we could eliminate lots platform
>> arch functions. I will post it out within one week.
> 
> That's a completely orthogonal problem. From the MSI/interrupt
> handling POV it does not matter at all where that information is
> stored. All we care about is that it is retrievable via the (pci)
> device which tries to setup MSI[X].
> 
> So we can store/retrieve it via generic functions into/from whatever
> is available right now. If the irq side has generic interfaces to do
> so then this wont conflict with your decisions to change the final
> storage point because all it takes is to tweak the storage/retrieve
> functions.
> 
> So all we need at the moment is an agreed on way to store/retrieve
> that information which is based on the current shared infrastructure,
> aka. Linus tree. If we can utilize that you are completely free to
> change the association mechanism underneath.
Hi Thomas,
	So we need something like:
struct msi_chip *pci_get_msi_chip(struct pci_dev *);
or:
struct irq_domain *pci_get_msi_domain(struct pci_dev *);

BTW, there's a conflict when merging tip/irq/irqdomain into
tip/x86/apic. It's my first time to deal with merging conflicts,
what's the preferred way? Is it working like this?
1) I merge the two branch
2) I rebase my x86 irqdomain patch sets and send them to you
3) You merge the two branch and apply my patch set.
Regards!
Gerry
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	tglx
> 
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ