linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] asm-generic: drop HARDIRQ

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: <20090615164415.GB14053@goodmis.org>
Date:	Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:44:15 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] asm-generic: drop HARDIRQ_BITS definition from
	hardirq.h


[ Note: I prefer email to rostedt@...dmis.org over srostedt@...hat.com,
  just because I don't read my RH email as often. ]

On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 10:43:31PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> linux/hardirq.h contains a fallback for HARDIRQ_BITS to 10
> if it's not defined, so it is pointless to define a default
> of 8 in asm/hardirq.h. There does not seem to be a good
> reason why an architecture would want to limit the number
> of hardirqs this way.

After reading the thread again (from the beginning) I have a better idea
of what you are talking about. But the above description is misleading.

The HARDIRQ_BITS has nothing to do with the number of IRQS, it has to
do with the number of nested irqs allowed. Heck, 8 should be goog enough.

But the only thing I object to about this patch is that discription.

> 
> Reported-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> ---
>  include/asm-generic/hardirq.h |   13 -------------
>  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> On Sunday 14 June 2009, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > is there any downsides to using a "too large" value ?  i.e. if my
> > system has less than 256, does it make any difference at all if it's
> > set to 10 ?
> > -mike
> 
> None that I know of. I'm queuing this patch in my asm-generic tree now,
> unless Steven or someone else has a better idea.
> 
> 	Arnd <><
> 
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/hardirq.h b/include/asm-generic/hardirq.h
> index 3d5d2c9..23bb4da 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/hardirq.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/hardirq.h
> @@ -11,19 +11,6 @@ typedef struct {
>  
>  #include <linux/irq_cpustat.h>	/* Standard mappings for irq_cpustat_t above */
>  
> -#ifndef HARDIRQ_BITS
> -#define HARDIRQ_BITS	8
> -#endif
> -
> -/*
> - * The hardirq mask has to be large enough to have
> - * space for potentially all IRQ sources in the system
> - * nesting on a single CPU:
> - */
> -#if (1 << HARDIRQ_BITS) < NR_IRQS
> -# error HARDIRQ_BITS is too low!
> -#endif

For the content of the patch:

 Acked-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>

Because it too is misleading.

The only reason I did not remove all arch defined HARDIQR_BITS and just default
it to 10 or 8, is because one of the archs had that hardcoded in the asm, and
I did not want to break it.

-- Steve

> -
>  #ifndef ack_bad_irq
>  static inline void ack_bad_irq(unsigned int irq)
>  {
> -- 
> 1.6.3.1
> 
> --
> 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/
--
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/