linux-kernel - Re: [patch 46/47] powerpc: Use new irq allocator

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:	Sat, 2 Oct 2010 06:11:33 +0900
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, x86@...nel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 46/47] powerpc: Use new irq allocator

On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 5:46 AM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<benh@...nel.crashing.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-01 at 15:07 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Oct 2010, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>
>> > On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 23:18 +0000, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> > > plain text document attachment (powerpc-use-new-allocator.patch)
>> > > Use the new functions and free the descriptor when the virq is
>> > > destroyed.
>> >
>> > Looks ok as a first pass, but we should go further and replace the
>> > allocator we have in powerpc to use yours instead.
>> >
>> > Then I should get rid of my big irq_map that maps virq to HW number &
>> > domain pointers and instead put those in the irq data. Any objection to
>> > me sticking some archdata there for that purpose ?
>>
>> No, though if we can avoid another void pointer and have a sensible
>> data structure for it would be nice.
>
> Yes, I'm thinking about an arch defined structure like I did for struct
> device.

Before doing that, I'd like to see what data members are still needed.
 The powerpc use-case is quite sane, and it may turn out to be common
code after all.  I certainly want to port the PowerPC functionality to
ARM.

g.
--
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/