linux-kernel - Re: [GIT pull] irq fixes for .39.rc

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:	Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:28:39 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] irq fixes for .39.rc



On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > Please pull the latest irq-fixes-for-linus git tree from:
> >
> >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git irq-fixes-for-linus
> 
> Hmm. This has a fundamental merge  conflict with BenH's tree that I just pulled.
> 
> You guys did different things in arch/powerpc/include/asm/qe_ic.h:
> 
>  - BenH has:
> 
>         -       struct qe_ic *qe_ic = get_irq_desc_data(desc);
>         +       struct qe_ic *qe_ic = irq_desc_get_chip_data(desc);
> 
>  - Thomas has:
> 
>         -       struct qe_ic *qe_ic = get_irq_desc_data(desc);
>         +       struct qe_ic *qe_ic = irq_desc_get_handler_data(desc);
> 
> Note the "chip_data" vs "handler_data" difference.
> 
> And when I tried to figure out which one is the correct one, I see that
> 
>  - qe_ic_host_map does:
> 
>         irq_set_chip_data(virq, qe_ic);
> 
>  - qe_ic_init does:
> 
>         irq_set_handler_data(qe_ic->virq_low, qe_ic);
>         ...
>                 irq_set_handler_data(qe_ic->virq_high, qe_ic);
> 
> which just makes me go "Somebody is really really confused".
> 
> The whole thing may mean that both handler_data and chip_data contains
> the right thing, but it still makes me go "WTF?".
> 
> Which way should I resolve it?

get_irq_desc_data() maps to irq_desc_get_handler_data() so Richards
resolution is correct even if the other might work as well.

Thanks,

	tglx