| 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: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1010282050390.2692@localhost6.localdomain6> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:52:54 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...eaurora.org> cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm-owner@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC IRQ] genirq: fix handle_nested_irq for lazy disable On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Abhijeet Dharmapurikar wrote: > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Aside of that this wont work for edge triggered interrupts, as you'd > > loose the edge, so this needs more thought and a thorough look at the > > users of handle_nested_irq(). > > I didn't understand this though. This patch will mask the interrupt in the > controller even if it were edge. My interrupt controller latches > edges and wants a mask (or an ack) to be executed to deactivate the line > summary line. Do you mean that I should mark the interrupt IRQ_PENDING if it > were an edge before masking it? If not, can you please explain. See handle_edge_irq(). An edge is a one time event. Once you mask/ack it, it's gone. So now when you unmask it won't reissue the interrupt on the hardware level. Level interrupts do, as the mask does not affect that. 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists