linux-kernel - Re: question about drivers/dma/dma-jz4780.c

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:28:19 +0100
From:	Alex Smith <alex.smith@...tec.com>
To:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
CC:	<Zubair.Kakakhel@...tec.com>, <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Vaishali Thakkar" <vthakkar1994@...il.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: question about drivers/dma/dma-jz4780.c

On 24/07/2015 07:30, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 07:51:28AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>>> Yes for dmaengine drivers I do ask this question which typically ends up in
>>> driver invoking devm_irq_free() in driver's remove callback
>>>
>>> IMHO don't think devm irq calls are very useful, they do make stuff
>>> complicate
>>
>> Would it be better then to just go back to request_irq (or whatever is
>> appropriate in this case).  It would seem that the devm property can never
>> be relied on, so there is no point to use it.
>
> Yes I do think that is right way in this case
>

Hmm, OK, I will drop the patch I submitted removing the explicit 
devm_free_irq() call and send a new one which stops using the devm IRQ 
functions, and kills the tasklets.

Thanks,
Alex
--
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/