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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 11:22:32 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> To: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org, Rui Wang <rui.y.wang@...el.com>, Liu Ping Fan <kernelfans@...il.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Yoshihiro YUNOMAE <yoshihiro.yunomae.ez@...achi.com>, Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>, Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>, Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@...el.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Li Fei <fei.li@...el.com>, gong.chen@...ux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, fix x86 fixup_irqs() error handling On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, David Rientjes wrote: > On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c > > index d99f31d..55fab61 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c > > @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ void fixup_irqs(void) > > struct irq_desc *desc; > > struct irq_data *data; > > struct irq_chip *chip; > > + int ret; > > > > for_each_irq_desc(irq, desc) { > > int break_affinity = 0; > > @@ -389,8 +390,12 @@ void fixup_irqs(void) > > if (!irqd_can_move_in_process_context(data) && chip->irq_mask) > > chip->irq_mask(data); > > > > - if (chip->irq_set_affinity) > > - chip->irq_set_affinity(data, affinity, true); > > + if (chip->irq_set_affinity) { > > + ret = chip->irq_set_affinity(data, affinity, true); > > + WARN(ret == -ENOSPC, > > + "IRQ %d set affinity failed with %d. The device assigned to this IRQ is unstable.\n", > > + irq, ret); > > Should this be WARN_ON_ONCE() to avoid filling the kernel log instead? > > It doesn't make much sense to print out the negative return value, maybe > you meant to print -ret instead? Well, that does not make sense either. We only print if ret == -ENOSPC! > > + } > > else if (!(warned++)) > > set_affinity = 0; > > > -- 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