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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2013 20:50:57 +0800 From: yi zhang <yizhang.mrvl@...il.com> To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> Cc: Yi Zhang <yizhang@...vell.com>, zhouqiao@...vell.com, zhangwm@...vell.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Question]should we not ignore the masked interrupt in regmap? 2013/10/12 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>: > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:14:27AM +0800, yi zhang wrote: > >> 1) interrupt is triggered; >> 2) a thread disables it(then the mask bit is set); >> 3) _Then_ the interrupt thread is executed, it _ignore _ and doesn’t >> handle this interrupt; >> because the interrupt is not ACKed, the interrupt status is not cleared; >> 4) in Marvell's PMIC, the interrupt line to SOC is always asserted, >> then irq storm happens; > > This sounds like you need the workaround activated by init_ack_masked. > It's basically the hardware failing to implement masking sensibly - the > general expectation for a mask bit is that it will have no effect on the > actual state of the interrupt, only on if it's reported. Thanks Mark; As I understand it, this "init_ack_masked" is used in initialization (please correct me if I'm wrong); but if the sequence above happens not in the initialization, then what should we do to handle this? could you please give us advice? thanks very much; -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists