linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: mfd tree build failure

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091123152057.GH24326@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main>
Date:	Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:20:57 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: mfd tree build failure

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 03:44:14PM +0100, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 01:11:13PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:

> > I don't see getting them exported flying, especially not in the
> > timeframe we've got for the merge window.  Keeping them non-exported has
> > been a deliberate decision on the part of the genirq maintainers. 

> Out of curiosity, what's the reasoning behind thatdecision ?

Unless you're actually implementing an interrupt controller those APIs
should never be called and people should be using flags on request_irq()
or similar.  Driver authors have been awfully fond of bypassing those
APIs, but this prevents them doing so.

None of this is really a practical issue unless you implement an IRQ
controller in a driver and that's very rare (or has been up until now).
--
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/