linux-kernel - Re: Subject: L2x0 OF properties do not include 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]

Date:	Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:28:08 +0100
From:	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org" 
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux@....linux.org.uk" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"weizeng.he@....com" <weizeng.he@....com>,
	"workgroup.linux@....com" <workgroup.linux@....com>,
	"'Barry Song'" <21cnbao@...il.com>,
	"'Grant Likely'" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	"'Olof Johansson'" <olof@...om.net>
Subject: Re: Subject: L2x0 OF properties do not include interrupt #

On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 03:24:27PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 August 2011, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 02:59:12PM +0100, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > I think you should allow for either the single irq or individual irqs.
> > > You can specify that the event counter interrupt must be first, then the
> > > pmu driver could work either way ignoring the rest. The driver probably
> > > needs to mark the handler as shared if there is only the combined
> > > interrupt unless you expect all interrupts to be handled by 1 driver.
> > 
> > I much prefer having seperate, individual IRQs with no requirement on
> > ordering.
> > 
> 
> What do you mean with 'no requirement on ordering'? If we have multiple
> interrupt sources, we definitely want to identify which one calls which
> handler, and the only information we have is the position in the array
> of interrupt numbers.

I was hoping that it was possible to have separate properties which describe
the interrupt. So you could have something like pmu-interrupt <75> and
abort-interrupt <76> rather than interrupts <75, 76>.

I've not played with DT bindings before though, so if it's usually done with
an ordered list then so be it!

Will
--
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/