linux-kernel - Re: Add IRQS_PENDING for nested and simple irq handler as well

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: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1205212308590.3231@ionos>
Date:	Mon, 21 May 2012 23:12:09 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Ning Jiang <ning.n.jiang@...il.com>
cc:	rjw@...k.pl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Add IRQS_PENDING for nested and simple irq handler as well

On Tue, 22 May 2012, Ning Jiang wrote:

> >From eb72d4c573b482f85b227558deca297d8a8de1df Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Ning Jiang <ning.n.jiang@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 00:19:20 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] genirq: Add IRQS_PENDING for nested and simple irq
> handler as well
> 
> Usually nested and simple irq act as second level in interrupt
> distribution tree, in suspend, we need to keep first level irq
> functional by irq flag IRQF_NO_SUSPEND and check the 'pending'
> state in the second level.
> 
> More information can be found in the log of commit:

Please provide a proper explanation why you think that handling the
flag for those interrupts is important as well, rather than refering
to an explanation of something different.
 
Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/