linux-kernel - Re: [RFC patch 2/3] genirq: Add buslock support for irq chips on slow busses

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: <1250239811.5241.1198.camel@twins>
Date:	Fri, 14 Aug 2009 10:50:11 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Trilok Soni <soni.trilok@...il.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
	Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
	Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.shim@...sung.com>,
	m.szyprowski@...sung.com, t.fujak@...sung.com,
	kyungmin.park@...sung.com, David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>,
	Daniel Ribeiro <drwyrm@...il.com>, arve@...roid.com,
	Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 2/3] genirq: Add buslock support for irq chips on
 slow busses

On Thu, 2009-08-13 at 19:40 +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>  
> +/**
> + *	disable_slowbus_irq - disable an slowbus irq and wait for completion
> + *	@irq: Interrupt to disable
> + *
> + *	Disable the selected interrupt line.  Enables and Disables are
> + *	nested.
> + *	This function waits for any pending IRQ handlers for this interrupt
> + *	to complete before returning. If you use this function while
> + *	holding a resource the IRQ handler may need you will deadlock.
> + *
> + *	This function must not be called from IRQ context.
> + */
> +void disable_slowbus_irq(unsigned int irq)
> +{
> +	struct irq_desc *desc = irq_to_desc(irq);
> +
> +	if (!desc || !desc->chip || !desc->chip->bus_lock)
> +		return;
> +
> +	desc->chip->bus_lock(irq);
> +	disable_irq_nosync(irq);
> +	if (desc->action)
> +		synchronize_irq(irq);
> +	desc->chip->bus_sync_unlock(irq);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(disable_slowbus_irq);

Should we also not check that desc->chip->bus_lock is not set for the
regular function disable_irq()?

It seems to me mixing disable_irq() and disable_slowbus_irq() is a
recipe for disaster.

Same for the other slowbus functions of course.
--
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/