| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20100919111844.GQ3008@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 13:18:44 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com> To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com> Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] kvm: enable irq injection from interrupt context On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 12:55:12PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 12:56:12PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 09/19/2010 12:45 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > >On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 09:59:29AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > >> > writing 0 to eventfd does nothing. The way to deassert irq > > >> That is implementation detail of current irqfd. It was designed for MSI > > >> not level triggered interrupts. > > > > > >Maybe we should add a check that gsi is mapped to MSI (or unmapped) then? > > >Level which switches to 1 and back to 0 immediately will be racy anyway > > >... > > > > > > > Add a check where? > > I would make sure that if you bind irqfd to a non-MSI GSI, > signalling it has no effect. > Why would you do that? I am not against checking per se, but why a user of the API can't check for that? -- Gleb. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists