| 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.2.00.1010291725370.2692@localhost6.localdomain6> Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 17:26:23 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in> cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq: handle shared irqs in handle_nested_irq() On Fri, 29 Oct 2010, Rabin Vincent wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:24 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote: > > On Thu, 28 Oct 2010, Rabin Vincent wrote: > >> Allow shared irqs to work when nested threads are used for handling > >> threaded interrupts. > > > > Why do we want this ? handle_nested_irq() is called from a interrupt > > demultiplexer, so why would we need shared interrupts for this ? > > Threaded IRQ + handle_nested_irq() is used by I2C GPIO expander drivers > like chained hander + generic_handle_irq() is used by on-chip GPIO > drivers. If two irq handlers are registered on an on-chip GPIO > interrupt (because two devices are externally connected), it works. If > the handlers are instead registered on one of the expander's pins' > interrupt, without this patch, only the handler registered first is > called. Have the hardware dudes not yet understood that shared interrupts are a horrible idea ? Sigh, 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