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  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:	Sun, 26 Feb 2012 18:07:20 +0300
From:	Dan Carpenter <>
To:	santosh nayak <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [SCSI] pm8001: Fix bogus interrupt state flag issue.

On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 07:03:30PM +0530, santosh nayak wrote:
> From: Santosh Nayak <>
> Static checker is giving following warning:
> " error: calling 'spin_unlock_irqrestore()' with bogus flags"
> The code flow is as shown below:
> process_oq() --> process_one_iomb --> mpi_sata_completion
> In 'mpi_sata_completion'
> the first call for 'spin_unlock_irqrestore()' is with flags=0,
> which is as good as 'spin_unlock_irq()' ( unconditional interrupt
> enabling).
> So for better performance 'spin_unlock_irqrestore()' can be replaced
> with 'spin_unlock_irq()' and 'spin_lock_irqsave()' can be replaced by
> 'spin_lock_irq()'.

process_oq() is called from the interrupt handler pm8001_chip_isr()
with interrupts disabled.

  4301          spin_lock_irqsave(&pm8001_ha->lock, flags);
  4302          pm8001_chip_interrupt_disable(pm8001_ha);
  4303          process_oq(pm8001_ha);
  4304          pm8001_chip_interrupt_enable(pm8001_ha);
  4305          spin_unlock_irqrestore(&pm8001_ha->lock, flags);

Probably we should just be doing a spin_lock() and spin_unlock()
without re-enabling the IRQs.  Should we even be doing that in the
irq handler anyway?

dan carpenter

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists