linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] Fix regression introduced by set_irq

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: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1512051823140.3595@nanos>
Date:	Sat, 5 Dec 2015 18:24:31 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>
cc:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Tawfik Bayouk <tawfik@...vell.com>,
	Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>,
	Lior Amsalem <alior@...vell.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
	Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Fix regression introduced by set_irq_flags()
 removal

Thomas,

On Fri, 4 Dec 2015, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Well, the problem is that IRQ_NOAUTOEN is a global flag, which is OK
> for global interrupts, but not good for per-CPU interrupts, since you
> don't have the information on a per-CPU basis of which interrupt was
> enabled before suspend, and therefore should be re-enabled after resume.
> 
> Until now, we don't have the problem since the only per-CPU interrupt
> we were using was the local timer interrupt, and the local timers on
> secondary CPUs are switched off during suspend and re-enabled during
> resume. So re-enabling the interrupt on the boot CPU on resume is
> sufficient.
> 
> However, our network driver recently switched to using per-CPU
> interrupts as well, and in this case, it is really important to be able
> to re-enable the per-CPU interrupts and the appropriate CPUs at resume
> time. Since our HW registers are made so that it is not possible to
> read out at suspend time which interrupts are enabled, we have to ask
> the Linux kernel at resume time which interrupts should be re-enabled
> at the HW level. Which is what my more complicated series was doing.
> 
> Do you have other suggestions to allow us to know which per-CPU
> interrupts should be re-enabled on the different CPUs at resume time ?

Ok. That makes sense. So I'm going to pick up the core change.

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/