linux-kernel - Re: threaded interrupt handlers: what if hardirq part not disables device interrupt?

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]

Message-ID: <1312202678.2617.460.camel@laptop>
Date:	Mon, 01 Aug 2011 14:44:38 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Remy Bohmer <linux@...mer.net>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: threaded interrupt handlers: what if hardirq part not disables
 device interrupt?

On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 16:15 +0200, Remy Bohmer wrote:
> As alternative solution I can do the following as well:
> The driver now has a tasklet used for processing the queue. If I add
> IRQF_NO_THREAD as irq-flag, the thread is not created and the handler
> runs completely in hard-irq context. This seems to work okay, but it
> does not feel as the right solution.
> 
> How is this supposed to work? Do you have better ideas how to solve
> situations like this? 

This sounds like the total trainwreck known as tty/console, I believe
jwessel and tglx had some ideas on that. Maybe Jason can share what he
knows, I'm not up to speed on that issue.



--
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/