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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 10:40:57 +0800 From: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org> To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com> CC: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>, Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@...aro.org>, Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>, Graeme Gregory <graeme@...a.org.uk>, Jake Oshins <jakeo@...rosoft.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] Divorcing irqdomain and device_node On 10/12/2015 05:01 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, 6 Oct 2015, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> [This patch series used to be called "Making the generic ACPI GSI >> layer irqdomain aware", but as I've radically changed my approach to >> this problem, I've decided to reset the counters...] >> >> The irqdomain code is not entierely ACPI friendly, as it has some >> built-in knowledge of the device-tree. Nothing too harmful, but enough >> to scare the ARM ACPI developpers which end up with their own version >> of the square wheel. And some of the ramifications actually run deeper >> than initially expected. >> >> This series adapts the irqdomain code to use 'struct fwnode_handle' >> instead of 'struct device_node' as the identifier for a domain >> (compatibility interfaces are of course added). It also introduces a >> generic IRQ specifier that firmware interfaces (DT or ACPI) can >> directly use to configure interrupts, and allow the ACPI GSI code to >> be plugged into this. >> >> As examples, we convert the ARM GIC ACPI support to use irqdomains as >> originally intended, and rework the MSI code to also move away from >> using device nodes when using irqdomains. >> >> Overall, this gives us a way to use irqdomains on both DT and ACPI >> enabled platforms, having very little changes made to the actual >> drivers (other than the probing infrastructure). Because we keep the >> flow of information between the various layers identical between ACPI >> and DT, we immediately benefit from the existing infrastructure. >> >> This has been test-booted on Juno, is based on 4.3-rc4, and available at: >> >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git irq/irq-domain-fwnode-v1 >> >> Marc Zyngier (16): >> irqdomain: Use an accessor for the of_node field >> irqdomain: Convert irqdomain->of_node to fwnode >> irqdomain: Allow irq domain lookup by fwnode >> irqdomain: Introduce a firmware-specific IRQ specifier structure >> irqchip: Convert all alloc/xlate users from of_node to fwnode >> irqdomain: Introduce irq_create_fwspec_mapping >> irqdomain: Introduce irq_domain_create_{linear,tree} >> irqdomain: Add a fwnode_handle allocator >> acpi/gsi: Always perform an irq domain lookup >> acpi/gsi: Add acpi_set_irq_model to initialize the GSI layer >> irqchip/gic: Get rid of gic_init_bases() >> irqchip/gic: Switch ACPI support to stacked domains >> irqchip/gic: Kill the xlate method >> acpi/gsi: Cleanup acpi_register_gsi >> irqdomain: Introduce irq_domain_create_hierarchy >> irqdomain/msi: Use fwnode instead of of_node > > I really like this one way better than the previous attempts and I > couldn't find any real issue when going through them with a fine comb. Fully agree, this version removes the dependency on DT for ACPI. > > I'd like to get that into 4.4, so I have to ask for the opinion of > ACPI folks. Having an ack on those patches would be nice. I'm reviewing this patch set, and will have a test today. Thanks Hanjun -- 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