linux-kernel - Re: [v3.4-rc1] ACPI regression bisected

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:	Thu, 12 Apr 2012 22:42:11 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Jörg Otte <jrg.otte@...glemail.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [v3.4-rc1] ACPI regression bisected

On Thu, 12 Apr 2012, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > I feared that. So now is the question whether there is a way to mask
> > > the interrupt at the "device" level.
> 
> Probably not. Len?
> 
> > If not, I could be persuaded to provide a mechanism to force thread
> > all interrupts which are on that line, if there's a good argument to
> > do so.
> 
> Hmm, we could probably just use a work queue for this instead. I guess i drank
> the threaded
> interrupt kool aid too much when I did the patch :-)
> 
> I'll switch over to a workqueue.
> 
> Meanwhile the patch can be just reverted. The patch that needed it (delays in
> EC access to
> work around buggy Acer EC) was not merged by  Len so far, so there's nothing
> in tree right
> now that relies on the thread.
> 
> For 3.4 I think reverting is the right approach.

Ack.
--
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/