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: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 14:45:09 +0000 From: Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@...inx.com> To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> CC: "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>, "pawel.moll@....com" <pawel.moll@....com>, "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>, "ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>, "galak@...eaurora.org" <galak@...eaurora.org>, "rob@...dley.net" <rob@...dley.net>, "grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>, "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH] SPI: Add driver for Cadence SPI controller HI Mark, > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@...nel.org] > Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2014 6:04 PM > To: Harini Katakam > Cc: robh+dt@...nel.org; pawel.moll@....com; mark.rutland@....com; > ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk; galak@...eaurora.org; rob@...dley.net; > grant.likely@...aro.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; linux- > doc@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux- > spi@...r.kernel.org; Michal Simek > Subject: Re: [PATCH] SPI: Add driver for Cadence SPI controller > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:13:45PM +0000, Harini Katakam wrote: > > > > > > In this case both possible interrupt conditions are handled. > > > > Are you sure that's the case, and even if you are that's still not > > > handling the case where the device isn't flagging an interrupt at all. > > > The IXR_ALL mask is only used to disable all the interrupts in the > beginning. > > These two are the only interrupts enabled. > > And RXNEMPTY status is just polled. That interrupt is not enabled either > > This is all going to be fragile in the face of bugs or changes in the > code though and like I keep saying it doesn't handle interrupt sharing. OK. I dint consider interrupt sharing. Do you think the following implementation would be better? status = IRQ_NONE; if (intr_status & CDNS_SPI_IXR_MODF_MASK) { /* Handle this interrupt here */ status = IRQ_HANDLED; } else if (intr_status & CDNS_SPI_IXR_TXOW_MASK) { /* Handle this interrupt here */ status = IRQ_HANDLED; } return status; Regards, Harini -- 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