linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask

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]

Date:	Fri, 16 Oct 2015 11:53:21 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
cc:	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] genirq/msi: Do not use pci_msi_[un]mask_irq as default
 methods

Bjorn,

On Thu, 15 Oct 2015, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> 
> > When we create a generic MSI domain, that MSI_FLAG_USE_DEF_CHIP_OPS
> > is set, and that any of .mask or .unmask are NULL in the irq_chip
> > structure, we set them to pci_msi_[un]mask_irq.
> > 
> > This is a bad idea for at least two reasons:
> > - PCI_MSI might not be selected, kernel fails to build (yes, this is
> >   legitimate, at least on arm64!)
> > - This may not be a PCI/MSI domain at all (platform MSI, for example)
> > 
> > Either way, this looks wrong. Move the overriding of mask/unmask to
> > the PCI counterpart, and panic is any of these two methods is not
> > set in the core code (they really should be present).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>

Should I take that one?

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/