linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/47] Sparse irq rework

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:	Sun, 10 Oct 2010 19:20:51 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	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>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/47] Sparse irq rework

On 10/10/2010 02:32 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sat, 9 Oct 2010, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> On 10/08/2010 11:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Fri, 8 Oct 2010, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>> +	/* only handle fall out from setup_IO_APIC_irqs() */
>>>
>>> What's the fallout ? And why are we coming here in the first place
>>> when the irq is < 16 ?
>>
>> setup_IO_APIC_irqs only handle apic_id == 0 or apic_id > 0 but irq < 16 via acpi override.
>>
>> it seems IBM's system have apic_id == 1, and sci irq is using 30.
>>
>> so at that time add that setup_IO_APIC_irq_extra() to workaround it.
>> but it seems we set that two time when irq < 16.
>>
>>>
>>>> +	if (!((apic_id > 0) && (irq > 16)))
>>>> +		return;
> 
> I added this into the queue, but simplified it to 
> 
>   if (apic_id == 0 || irq < NR_IRQS_LEGACY)
> 
> Folded in the other fix and pushed out an updated tree.
> 

ok. please check another small fix.

diff --git a/kernel/irq/irqdesc.c b/kernel/irq/irqdesc.c
index b3805f3..2fb9df4 100644
--- a/kernel/irq/irqdesc.c
+++ b/kernel/irq/irqdesc.c
@@ -130,10 +130,11 @@ static struct irq_desc *alloc_desc(int irq, int node)
 	desc = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*desc), gfp, node);
 	if (!desc)
 		return NULL;
+
 	/* allocate based on nr_cpu_ids */
 	desc->kstat_irqs = kzalloc_node(nr_cpu_ids * sizeof(*desc->kstat_irqs),
 					 gfp, node);
-	if (!desc)
+	if (!desc->kstat_irqs)
 		goto err_desc;
 
 	if (alloc_masks(desc, gfp, node))
@@ -226,6 +227,7 @@ struct irq_desc irq_desc[NR_IRQS] __cacheline_aligned_in_smp = {
 static unsigned int kstat_irqs_all[NR_IRQS][NR_CPUS];
 int __init early_irq_init(void)
 {
+	int node = first_online_node;
 	struct irq_desc *desc;
 	int count;
 	int i;
@@ -241,8 +243,8 @@ int __init early_irq_init(void)
 		desc[i].irq_data.irq = i;
 		desc[i].irq_data.chip = &no_irq_chip;
 		desc[i].kstat_irqs = kstat_irqs_all[i];
-		alloc_masks(desc + i, GFP_KERNEL, first_online_node);
-		desc_smp_init(desc + i, first_online_node);
+		alloc_masks(desc + i, GFP_KERNEL, node);
+		desc_smp_init(desc + i, node);
 		lockdep_set_class(&desc[i].lock, &irq_desc_lock_class);
 	}
 	return arch_early_irq_init();
--
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/