linux-kernel - RE: [RFC trollpatch 1/1] genirq: Remove the fits all and nothing __do

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:	Mon, 27 Sep 2010 20:49:49 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	"linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org" <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-cris-kernel@...s.com" <linux-cris-kernel@...s.com>,
	"linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org>,
	Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
	Hirokazu Takata <takata@...ux-m32r.org>,
	Greg Ungerer <gerg@...inux.org>, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
	"linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
	"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC trollpatch 1/1] genirq: Remove the fits all and nothing
 __do_IRQ() code

On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Luck, Tony wrote:

> > No, it's deliberate. The solution is to use the correct flow handler
> > for your device. We have currently several flow handlers implemented:
> 
> Yes, I found the different "handle_*_irq()" functions. The _percpu_
> variant works fine for the ia64 per-cpu interrupt paths.
> 
> But *NONE* of them call desc->chip->end() (even though the code flow
> in Documentation/DcoBook/genericirq.tmpl says that three of them do
> call it].  So it appears that this was thought to be necessary when
> the docs were written, but was not put into the code.

Yeah, sorry.
 
> The ia64 chip->end function for edge triggered interrupts is a nop(),
> so handle_edge_irq() ought to work just fine for it [can't confirm
> from my initial tests because the HP box I'm using only has level
> triggered ones].
> 
> handle_level_irq() works for my level triggered interrupts if I add
> a "desc->chip->end(irq)" call to it.

Hmm, why isn't chip->unmask() sufficient ?
 
> git grep "chip->end" appears to show that the only use of chip->end
> is in the "Recovery handler for misrouted interrupts": try_one_irq()

Right, that's just due to the old __do_IRQ() compability.
 
> At minimum we seem to have some documentation inconsistencies with
> the code.

Will fix.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/