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: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:43:55 -0700 From: "Williams, Mitch A" <mitch.a.williams@...el.com> To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com> Cc: "Grant Grundler" <grundler@...isc-linux.org>, <linux-pci@...ey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>, <gregkh@...e.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, "Kok, Auke-jan H" <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH 2.6.21-rc5] MSI: read-flush MSI-X table Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> However the mask function is called at EVERY interrupt, >> so this change would be VERY expensive. > >If true I think that would be bad. However I don't see it. >Where in handle_edge_irq do we mask the interrupt? >The only place I see us calling ->mask is from move_native_irq >and that only if IRQ_MOVE_PENDING is true. > >All I can see is us routinely calling is ack_APIC_edge. Doh! I was reading the code wrong. We only mask if we're still handling a previous interrupt on the same vector. My bad. However, I can't really see where mask() is used outside of that instance. Which then leads us back to the question: do we need a read flush on mask/unmask or just enable/disable? - 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