linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm: irq: Allow for specification of no preallocated irqs

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: <20120119225710.GG10404@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 19 Jan 2012 22:57:10 +0000
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To:	Michael Bohan <mbohan@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	grant.likely@...retlab.ca, tglx@...utronix.de,
	robherring2@...il.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: irq: Allow for specification of no preallocated
	irqs

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 02:43:44PM -0800, Michael Bohan wrote:
> For cases with SPARSE_IRQ enabled, irqs preallocated with
> arch_probe_nr_irqs() are already marked as allocated in the
> allocated_irqs bitmap. As a consequence, irq chip drivers that
> allocate irqs will feel one of two behaviors:
> 
> 1. An allocation will succeed with the starting irq_base one
> more than the preallocated irqs. This will thus waste the
> preceeding interrupt resources that were preallocated, unless a
> legacy chip driver happens to assume ownership of these by some
> platform definition. The GIC driver is a typical primary chip
> driver, and abides to the allocation APIs. So this can be a
> problem in many trivial usecases.
> 
> 2. An allocation will fail with < 0. This can also happen in the
> GIC driver, which interprets this value as meaning the irq_descs
> are already preallocated. But in Device Tree configurations, the
> fallback irq_base is -1. This results in an invalid irq_base
> value.
> 
> Looking forward, we are moving towards a world where preallocation
> of irqs is no longer necessary. irq_domain is scoped to handle all
> irq_desc allocations in the future. Thus, we should support
> configurations where the platform wants to preallocate no irqs.

Actually, leave nr_irqs unsigned.  Even when we have no preallocation,
we do not want to allow anything to get IRQ0.  Platforms which don't
want to have any preallocated IRQs should set NR_IRQS to zero as well
as their platforms nr_irqs entry.

That's basically how it works today, so no code changes should be
necessary.
--
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/