linux-kernel - Re: lockdep and threaded IRQs

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:	Sat, 28 Feb 2009 12:19:53 -0800
From:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, me@...ipebalbi.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
	felipe.balbi@...ia.com, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
	sameo@...nedhand.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: lockdep and threaded IRQs

On Saturday 28 February 2009, Stefan Richter wrote:
> Ah, so there /is/ a threaded IRQ handler implementation in
> the mainline, down in some driver framework...

One that's a bit more powerful than the recent patch
proposal, I'd say, since it chains.

> Why don't these drivers simply use <linux/workqueue.h>?

Most do.  In fact, that one *does* ... what's your point?

If I hadn't know that more generic threaded IRQ support
was already on the way, I might have done more with that
particular driver than just massive cleanup.  I stopped
short of some changes that it seemed genirq should obviate
before too long.  As always, more cleanup *could* be done.

- Dave

--
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/