linux-kernel - Re: Can we conditionally force threading irq with primary and thread handler?

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, 3 Dec 2015 23:33:14 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	okuno.kohji@...panasonic.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Can we conditionally force threading irq with primary and thread
 handler?

Yunhong,

On Thu, 3 Dec 2015, Yunhong Jiang wrote:

> Hi, Thomas
> 	On Commit 2a1d3ab8986d1b2 ("genirq: Handle force threading of irqs 
> with primary and thread handler"), even if the caller of 
> request_threaded_irq() provides a primary handler, that primary handler will 
> be invoked in thread context. This may cause some latency issue for high 
> real time requirement.
> 
> 	I checked the discussion on https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/19/372 with 
> Okuno and seems we need this change only if the irq is shared, otherwise, we 
> can still use Okuno's mechanism, am I right? Do you think it's ok to force 
> the primary handler for shared IRQ, otherwise, clear the IRQF_ONESHOT?

If you want to avoid that the primary handler is force threaded, then
you can indicate that with IRQF_NO_THREAD.

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/