linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] Remove 'irq' argument from all irq handlers

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:	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:41:03 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Remove 'irq' argument from all irq handlers

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> writes:
> 
> > * Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> wrote:
> >
> >> > thanks for doing this.
> >> 
> >> Yes.  keeping this alive is good.
> >> 
> >> The practical question is how do we make this change without breaking 
> >> the drivers that use their irq argument.
> >
> > the get_irq_regs() approach worked out really well. We should do a 
> > get_irq_nr() and be done with it?
> 
> The problem are some drivers today pass in 0 for their irq number
> to flag that they are calling the interrupt handler in a polling
> mode (not from interrupt context?) so the same logic doesn't quite apply.
> 
> Do what you suggest would likely break those drivers.

How many of them do we have ? This is a wilful abuse of the API, so
its not a big damage if they break.

    tglx
-
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/