linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq: support IRQ_NESTED_THREAD with non-threaded interrupt handlers

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:	Tue, 08 Jun 2010 09:23:40 +0200
From:	Esben Haabendal <eha@...edevelopment.dk>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Esben Haabendal <esbenhaabendal@...il.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, Marc Zyngier <maz@...terjones.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	joachim.eastwood@...ron.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] irq: support IRQ_NESTED_THREAD with non-threaded
 interrupt handlers

On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 08:58 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: 
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010, Esben Haabendal wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:06 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > Maybe you understand now, why I was pretty sure upfront, that your
> > > approach was wrong even without knowing all the gory details ? :)
> > 
> > I understand.  There is a better solution, which is to use threaded
> > interrupts where needed.
> 
> FWIW, it just occured to me, that the only reason why the
> disable_irq_nosysnc() trips up on the in_atomic() check is your
> fiddling with the nested irq dispatcher. 
> 
> If you just would have changed the phy driver to
> request_irq_any_context() it would have simply worked out of the box,
> without any need to remove buslock and changing genirq code at all.
> 
> That would not give you the advantage of getting rid of the two
> additional I2C transfers, but that's nn optimzation not a functional
> requirement.

Now, that is good news. Thanks!

/Esben

--
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/