linux-kernel - Re: Why isn't IRQ shared for i2c-ocore

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]

Message-ID: <554B7AC5.5040401@freescale.com>
Date:	Thu, 7 May 2015 07:46:29 -0700
From:	York Sun <yorksun@...escale.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
CC:	<Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>, <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
	<wolfram@...-dreams.de>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why isn't IRQ shared for i2c-ocore



On 05/07/2015 12:01 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>> I have a follow up question regarding interrupt. I see many I2C bus drivers
>> request interrupt with flag = 0. Why not using IRQF_SHARED?
> 
> Probably because that particular IRQ is only used by the I2C
> Controller.  I'm not exactly sure that you're getting at?  Why do you
> think it should be shared?  You should only flag it as shared if it
> is.

I am working on a driver for multifunction card with open core I2C controller.
The interrupt is shared between I2C and other controller.

> 
>> I understand the performance concern. If there is any other reason, I want to
>> know about it before I go too far on my driver.
> 
> This sort of stuff is trivial to fix and shouldn't stand in the way
> of you writing and submitting v1 of your driver.
> 

It is trivial to fix. I just want to know if there is any reason the interrupt
wasn't shared. Seems not.

York
--
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/