linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 1/5] PM / Runtime: Add getter for quering the IRQ safe option

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]

Date:	Wed, 24 Sep 2014 19:53:02 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
Cc:	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/5] PM / Runtime: Add getter for quering the IRQ safe
 option

On Wed 2014-09-24 15:50:08, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Add a simple getter pm_runtime_is_irq_safe() for quering whether runtime
> PM IRQ safe was set or not.
> 
> Various bus drivers implementing runtime PM may use choose to suspend
> differently based on IRQ safeness status of child driver (e.g. do not
> unprepare the clock if IRQ safe is not set).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
> Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>

Are you sure this is good interface?

"Tell me if another function works this or that way".

That's certainly not traditional interface, and it seems dangerous to
me. Callbacks now have different semantic requirements based on value
of some flag...

Would it be possible to have two sets of callbacks, one irq safe and
one not?
								Pavel

-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/