linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver

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: <5568E3E8.7070008@roeck-us.net>
Date:	Fri, 29 May 2015 15:10:48 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>, Fu Wei <fu.wei@...aro.org>
CC:	Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
	Linaro ACPI Mailman List <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
	linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	Wei Fu <tekkamanninja@...il.com>,
	G Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
	Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>,
	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@...aro.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, vgandhi@...eaurora.org,
	wim@...ana.be, Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
	Leo Duran <leo.duran@....com>, Jon Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] Watchdog: introduce ARM SBSA watchdog driver

On 05/29/2015 08:46 AM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On 05/29/2015 09:32 AM, Fu Wei wrote:
>> It is a SPI, every CPU can get it,
>> But maybe I miss something, but please let me know if other CPU can
>> not get the interrupt.
>
> There's only one watchdog device, so there's only one interrupt.  I don't know which CPU will get the interrupt, but the watchdog is not a per-CPU device.
>
Plus, that one interrupt is not shared, and the driver returns
IRQ_HANDLED even if the bit is not set. So _something_ is definitely
wrong. Either the interrupt is shared, then it needs to be requested
as shared and the handler should only return IRQ_HANDLED if it actually
handles the interrupt. Or it is not shared and the handler should always
handle it.

Guenter

--
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/