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  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:	Fri, 23 Aug 2013 21:45:10 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <>
To:	Matthew Garrett <>
CC:	Darren Hart <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
	Linus Walleij <>,
	"" <>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>
Subject: Re: ACPI vs Device Tree - moving forward

On 08/23/2013 08:06 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 07:55:31PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> Question is: Does this work _today_ with any existing driver, where
>> one interrupt is served through ACPI and another as 'standard' Linux
>> interrupt ? If yes, it must be working, and using fdt to describe
>> the interrupt mapping for the non-ACPI interrupt should not make
>> a difference. If no, the problem does not really have anything
>> to do with fdt.
> There's no such thing as an ACPI interrupt, it's just a data source in
> the same way that PnP used to be. _CRS refers to platform interrupts.
Ah, you are catching my lack of ACPI knowledge.

Rephrasing the question:

"What happens when you have an ACPI device that contains an interrupt in
  _CRS and contains a different interrupt in an embedded FDT block?"

Does the situation occur today, ie does it ever happen that one interrupt
for a device is specified (if that is the correct term) in _CRS and
another by some other means ?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists