linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] PCI: iproc: Add INTx support with better modeling

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:   Wed, 30 May 2018 03:59:33 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
Cc:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] PCI: iproc: Add INTx support with better modeling

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 12:58 AM, Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com> wrote:
> Add PCIe legacy interrupt INTx support to the iProc PCIe driver by
> modeling it with its own IRQ domain. All 4 interrupts INTA, INTB, INTC,
> INTD share the same interrupt line connected to the GIC in the system,
> while the status of each INTx can be obtained through the INTX CSR
> register

> +       while ((status = iproc_pcie_read_reg(pcie, IPROC_PCIE_INTX_CSR) &
> +               SYS_RC_INTX_MASK) != 0) {
> +               for_each_set_bit(bit, &status, PCI_NUM_INTX) {
> +                       virq = irq_find_mapping(pcie->irq_domain, bit + 1);
> +                       if (virq)
> +                               generic_handle_irq(virq);
> +                       else
> +                               dev_err(dev, "unexpected INTx%u\n", bit);
> +               }
> +       }

do {
  status = ...;
  for_each_set_bit() {
    ...
  }
} while (status);

would look slightly better for my opinion.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko