| 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: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 13:02:41 +0000 From: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk> To: Ian Molton <spyro@....com> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Kernel-discuss] RFC - platform device, IRQs and SoC devices On Sat, Nov 25, 2006 at 12:51:17PM +0000, Ian Molton wrote: > Russell King wrote: > >It's quite possible to have: > > > >IRQ chip > >0 irqchip_0 > >1 irqchip_0 > >2 irqchip_1 > >3 irqchip_0 > >4 irqchip_0 > >5 irqchip_1 > >6 irqchip_2 > >7 irqchip_2 > >8 irqchip_2 > >9 irqchip_1 > > > >Where do you start '0' for each irqchip? How do you split the irq_desc > >array between the irqchips? > > I see no reason why this couldnt continue to work 'as is' with the new > behaviour only applying to irqchips with their own non-NULL irq_desc array. That creates a multi-class system. Not nice from the maintainability aspect. Nevertheless, please produce patches to demonstrate this idea in detail. > The other problem is integration with /proc, specifically the irq usage > counter. There's interrupt numbers elsewhere in procfs other than /proc/interrupts - eg, the /proc/stat "intr" line is just one example. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: - 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