linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 13/17] net: gianfar: remove misuse of IRQF_NO

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: <BY2PR0301MB072700F43F00CFC273FED1B59C460@BY2PR0301MB0727.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date:	Mon, 21 Sep 2015 16:24:15 +0000
From:	Manoil Claudiu <claudiu.manoil@...escale.com>
To:	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Kevin Hao <haokexin@...il.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 13/17] net: gianfar: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sudeep Holla [mailto:sudeep.holla@....com]
>Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 6:47 PM
>To: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>; Thomas Gleixner
><tglx@...utronix.de>; Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>; David S. Miller
><davem@...emloft.net>; Manoil Claudiu-B08782
><claudiu.manoil@...escale.com>; Kevin Hao <haokexin@...il.com>;
>netdev@...r.kernel.org
>Subject: [PATCH 13/17] net: gianfar: remove misuse of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND
>flag
>
>The device is set as wakeup capable using proper wakeup API but the
>driver misuses IRQF_NO_SUSPEND to set the interrupt as wakeup source
>which is incorrect.
>
>This patch removes the use of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flags replacing it with
>enable_irq_wake instead.
>

What would be the purpose of IRQF_NO_SUSPEND flag then?  The flag is a
friendlier API compared to calling enable_irq_wake().  For older kernels,
on PPC architectures, the flag did the job.  When did this change? Since
when using IRQF_NO_SUSPEND is a "misuse"?

Thanks,
Claudiu
--
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/