linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sdio: optimized SDIO IRQ handling for single function

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <BANLkTinUnDN_ZE5hQuQvDUTFUJV+ZpTTag@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 4 May 2011 18:03:13 +0200
From:	Per Forlin <per.forlin@...aro.org>
To:	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
	Stefan Nilsson XK <stefan.xk.nilsson@...ricsson.com>,
	Ulf HANSSON <ulf.hansson@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sdio: optimized SDIO IRQ handling for single function

On 4 May 2011 17:20, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 May 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
>
>> On 4 May 2011 05:40, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 3 May 2011, Per Forlin wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: Stefan Nilsson XK <stefan.xk.nilsson@...ricsson.com>
>> >>
>> >> If there is only 1 function registered, and IRQ:s are supported and
>> >> currently enabled, call the callback handler directly
>> >> without checking the CCCR registers.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Nilsson XK <stefan.xk.nilsson@...ricsson.com>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Per Forlin <per.forlin@...aro.org>
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
>> >
>> I am working o a patch version 2 after offline discussion with Ulf Hansson.
>> Instead of adding this code here.
>> Add sdio_single_func member in mmc_card. Set and reset this function
>> in sdio_claim_irq and sdio_release_irq.
>> process_sdio_pending_irqs would only check if sdio_single_func is !=
>> null and call it.
>
> Yes, that's what I was about to propose after thinking about it some
> more.
>
>> This will result in a bigger patch overall but the new code in
>> process_sdio_pending_irqs will be minimal.
>
> Something like this (untested) ?
>
What I had in mind is similar. Please let me know what you think. I am
about to post "patch v2"

Regards,
Per
--
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/