linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] RISC-V: Make IPI triggering flexible

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, 4 Sep 2018 11:50:02 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/5] RISC-V: Make IPI triggering flexible

On Tue, Sep 04, 2018 at 06:15:10PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> The mechanism to trigger IPI is generally part of interrupt-controller
> driver for various architectures. On RISC-V, we have an option to trigger
> IPI using SBI or SOC vendor can implement RISC-V CPU where IPI will be
> triggered using SOC interrupt-controller (e.g. custom PLIC).

Which is exactly what we want to avoid, and should not make it easy.

The last thing we need is non-standard whacky IPI mechanisms, and
that is why we habe SBI calls for it.  I think we should simply
stat that if an RISC-V cpu design bypasse the SBI for no good reason
we'll simply not support it.

So NAK for this patch.