linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during irq migration.

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5986589C150B2F49A46483AC44C7BCA4907417@ssvlexmb2.amd.com>
Date:	Mon, 5 Feb 2007 15:33:36 -0800
From:	"Lu, Yinghai" <yinghai.lu@....com>
To:	ebiederm@...ssion.com
cc:	"Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Luigi Genoni" <luigi.genoni@...elli.com>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Natalie Protasevich" <protasnb@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] x86_64 irq: Handle irqs pending in IRR during
 irq migration.

-----Original Message-----
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com [mailto:ebiederm@...ssion.com] 
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 3:03 PM
>Nope. irq routines are a stack.  if apic_in_service_vector could return
>the wrong value.  ack_APIC_irq() which use the same information would
>acknowledge the wrong irq.  If there was actually any danger of
>mis-computing that information I would just pass it from the interrupt
>service routine stash it in a per cpu variable and then read it out.
>But the apic already has registers doing that, so I was lazy and used
>what was available.  It should be the common case that we need that
>information.

OK.

I wonder if current kernel support different cpu handle irq request for
different device at the same time.

YH


-
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/