linux-kernel - Re: sharing interrupt between PCI device

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8d6898730811100742g31711b9ck9e046d77273d0113@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:12:05 +0530
From:	"Nobin Mathew" <nobin.mathew@...il.com>
To:	"Grant Grundler" <grundler@...isc-linux.org>
Cc:	"Jiri Slaby" <jirislaby@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, "Robert Hancock" <hancockr@...w.ca>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: sharing interrupt between PCI device

I could not find the definition of acpi_unregister_gsi in i386/x86_64
code, it is defined only for ia64.

Since it is defined as a weak symbol, I feel it is not getting called
(correct if I am wrong, I searched in google for this).

/* FIXME: implement x86/x86_64 version */
void __attribute__ ((weak)) acpi_unregister_gsi(u32 i)
{
}

How this weak symbols work, is it something like
acpi_pci_irq_disable() will not call acpi_unregister_gsi() in some
platforms.

Thanks
Nobin Mathew.

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Nobin Mathew <nobin.mathew@...il.com> wrote:
> Yes USB Virtual Controller has input devices like keyboard and mouse
> (routed through hpilo card (remote console)), so those things stops
> working when we remove hpilo driver.
>
> Thanks
> Nobin Mathew
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
>>
>> * Grant Grundler <grundler@...isc-linux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> [+ingo - question for you about disable_irq() below]
>>
>>> The same problem exists with disable_irq() : only takes a global
>>> IRQ# and no additional identifying information to prevent disabling
>>> a shared IRQ. So I'm not sure if this is a bug with ACPI or design
>>> flaw in generic IRQ APIs.  Ingo?
>>
>> that's how disable_irq() always worked: it disables all handlers on
>> that IRQ#. If the IRQ# is shared, it disables all handlers.
>>
>>        Ingo
>>
>
--
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/