linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: dln2: fix issue when an IRQ is unmasked then enabled

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdagZrxVAjUtPf6+Eef_pGeReQijBtiR5cT2Yom3BS8qVw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 5 Jan 2015 09:55:25 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@...el.com>
Cc:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: dln2: fix issue when an IRQ is unmasked then enabled

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Octavian Purdila
> <octavian.purdila@...el.com> wrote:
>
>> As noticed during suspend/resume operations, the IRQ can be unmasked
>> then disabled in suspend and eventually enabled in resume, but without
>> being unmasked.
>>
>> The current implementation does not take into account interactions
>> between mask/unmask and enable/disable interrupts, and thus in the
>> above scenarios the IRQs remain unactive.
>>
>> To fix this we removed the enable/disable operations as they fallback
>> to mask/unmask anyway.
>>
>> We also remove the pending bitmaks as it is already done in irq_data
>> (i.e. IRQS_PENDING).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@...el.com>
>
> Patch applied for fixes.

Bah now that I see there are several versions of the patch set
floating around and also MFD patches I don't quite understand
how acute this is or how it's to be applied.

- Are these regression fixes or nice to have for next kernel
 release?

- Are the GPIO patches independent of the MFD patch?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/