linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] ide: ->ide_dma_clear_irq() -> ->clear

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]

Message-ID: <48CEDD89.5060107@ru.mvista.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Sep 2008 02:11:21 +0400
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>
To:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] ide: ->ide_dma_clear_irq() -> ->clear_irq()

Hello, I wrote:

>> * Rename ->ide_dma_clear_irq method to ->clear_irq
>>   and move it from ide_hwif_t to struct ide_port_ops.
>>
>> * Move ->waiting_for_dma check inside ->clear_irq method.
>>
>> * Move ->dma_base check inside ->clear_irq method.
>>
>> piix.c:
>> * Add ich_port_ops and remove init_hwif_ich() wrapper.
>>
>> There should be no functional changes caused by this patch.
>>   
>
>   Good. I think it's worth implementing this method in at least 
> cmd64x.c which actually reads the IDE interrupt latch bits 
> (independent from the DMA interrupt status) in the dma_test_irq() 
> methods but never clears them, so the latches may reflect a 
> non-current state of the IDE interrupt...

   I forgot that it does clear them in its dma_end() methods (which I 
myself have reworked :-).
   It seems however that at least for SFF-8038 compatibles, it makes 
sense to leave it that way since INTRQ might be asserted while BMIDE 
interrupt bit is not, so the interrupt latch would need clearing even on 
DMA timeout...

>   It may also be worth considering turning this method into 
> test-and-clear, so that we can get the actual IDE interrupt state on 
> the chips that implement this...

   Probably might add the test_irq() method to be called on 
!hwif->waiting_for_dma. Cleraing the status at once seems impractical...

>> Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
>
> Acked-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@...mvista.com>

   Not feeling sure about this patch -- ->waiting_for_dma probably 
should've been left where it was...

MBR, Sergei


--
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/