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:	Wed, 25 Nov 2015 19:43:50 +0000
From:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@...il.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
	Maxime Bizon <mbizon@...ebox.fr>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/10] watchdog: bcm63xx_wdt: Use WATCHDOG_CORE

On 25/11/15 14:10, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 11/25/2015 05:02 AM, Simon Arlott wrote:
>> On Wed, November 25, 2015 02:44, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> The "running" flag should no longer be needed. watchdog_active()
>>> should provide that information.
>>
>> I'm going to need to keep that because I need to know if it's running
>> in the interrupt handler, and wdd->lock is a mutex.
>>
>>>> @@ -306,17 +202,18 @@ unregister_timer:
>>>>
>>>>    static int bcm63xx_wdt_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>    {
>>>> -	if (!nowayout)
>>>> -		bcm63xx_wdt_hw_stop();
>>>> +	struct watchdog_device *wdd = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>>>
>>>> -	misc_deregister(&bcm63xx_wdt_miscdev);
>>>>    	bcm63xx_timer_unregister(TIMER_WDT_ID);
>>>> +	watchdog_unregister_device(wdd);
>>>
>>> Shouldn't that come first, before unregistering the timer ?
>>
>> No, because wdd->dev is used in the interrupt handler. I will have to
>> move registration of the interrupt to after creating the watchdog
>> because it could currently be used before wdd->dev is set.
>>
> 
> Does unregistering the timer disable the interrupt ?

No, it sets the callback for that timer to NULL so that it won't be
called.

-- 
Simon Arlott
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ