linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] genirq: spurious irq detection for 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:	Fri, 5 Mar 2010 08:58:39 +0100
From:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: spurious irq detection for threaded irqs

On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 11:26:20PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2010, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > -void note_interrupt(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc,
> > -		    irqreturn_t action_ret)
> > +void note_threaded_interrupt(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc,
> > +		irqreturn_t action_ret)
> >  {
> >  	if (unlikely(action_ret != IRQ_HANDLED)) {
> >  		/*
> > @@ -262,6 +262,19 @@ void note_interrupt(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc,
> >  	desc->irqs_unhandled = 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > +void note_interrupt(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc,
> > +		irqreturn_t action_ret)
> > +{
> > +	if (action_ret == IRQ_WAKE_THREAD)
> > +		/* handled in irq_thread() when the threaded handler returns */
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	/* don't report IRQ_WAKE_THREAD | IRQ_HANDLED as bogus return value */
> > +	action_ret &= ~IRQ_WAKE_THREAD;
> > +
> > +	note_threaded_interrupt(irq, desc, action_ret);
> > +}
> > +
> 
> We don't need an extra function for that. A simple
> 
> 	if (action_ret & IRQ_WAKE_THREAD)
> 		return;
> 
> in note_interrupt() is sufficient to cover everything.
With your suggestion if action_ret == IRQ_WAKE_THREAD | IRQ_HANDLED then
the IRQ_HANDLED bit doesn't get noted.  Does that matter?

But still you're right about the extra function.  Assuming a threaded
handler doesn't return IRQ_WAKE_THREAD my note_interrupt does the same
as note_threaded_interrupt.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
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/