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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Mon, 1 Jun 2015 15:50:09 +0800
From:	Fu Wei <fu.wei@...aro.org>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
	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

Hi Guenter , Timur

On 30 May 2015 at 06:10, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> 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.

I have thought about this again, For now, I did not find any reason to
keep that "if (status & SBSA_GWDT_WCS_WS0)"

So you are right, I should delete it.

and for IRQF_TIMER,  I will delete it.

Thanks for your correction.

>
> Guenter
>



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021
--
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/