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  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:	Sun, 03 Oct 2010 17:49:51 -0700
From: (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Thomas Gleixner <>
Cc:	LKML <>,,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,,
	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <>,
	Paul Mundt <>,
	Russell King <>,
	David Woodhouse <>,
	Jesse Barnes <>,
	Yinghai Lu <>,
	Grant Likely <>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/47] Sparse irq rework

Thomas Gleixner <> writes:

> On Sun, 3 Oct 2010, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Thomas Gleixner <> writes:
>> > Rationale:
>> > ----------
>> >
>> > The current sparse_irq allocator has several short comings due to
>> > failures in the design or the lack of it:
>> >
>> >  - Requires iteration over the number of active irqs to find a free slot
>> >    Some architectures have grown their own workarounds for this.
>> >
>> >  - Freeing of irq descriptors is not possible
>> >
>> >  - Racy between create_irq_nr and destroy_irq plugged by horrible
>> >    callbacks
>> >
>> >  - Migration of active irq descriptors is not possible
>> I believe you have distored the design when aiming for migration
>> of active irq descriptors (which you have not even implemented yet).
>> How do you plan to remove the radix tree lookup from the irq
>> handling path?
> Not at all and it's not even even a requirement to remove the lookup
> for implementing live migration.

It sounds like it is a requirement to *keep* the lookup for supporting
live migration.  *Keeping* the lookup I see as a serious problem.  If we
do this right the only users of the radix tree will be drivers using the
functions in interrupt.h.

>> Those files provide the genirq irq chip implementation especially
>> drivers/pci/msi.c.  Of course they will do what every other irq_chip
>> implementation does to get access to data.  There is an unpleasant
>> difference between which generic irq data field htirq.c uses and msi.c
>> which may be worth cleaning up.  But otherwise I don't see any
>> fundamental problems.
> The fundamental problem I hit, was the hack which handed down irq_desc
> to avoid the lookup. If it had been msi_desc in the first place, then
> I would not even need to touch the msi code to cleanup x86.

Just because you intend to rename the irq_desc irq_data...

It isn't a hack for an irq method to look at irq_desc.  At least not
until your irq_data changes go through.  This has nothing to do with
how x86 is structured and everything to do with your irq_data
``cleanup'' which appears to be mostly about code churn, for very little
apparent benefit.

In the current state of the kernel I find it very hard to swallow that
having a genirq client using irq_desc (which is the only way to
implement somethings) is a hack.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists