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]

Date:	Tue, 8 Dec 2015 11:54:11 +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

On Tue, 8 Dec 2015, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> When a device driver uses a normal (non per-CPU) interrupt, then it
> doesn't have to take care of disabling the interrupt on suspend and
> re-enabling the interrupt on resume at the interrupt controller level.
> This is all transparently handled by the irqchip driver.
> 
> Why should the handling of per-CPU interrupts be different and require
> explicit handling from each device driver rather than being
> transparently handled by the irqchip driver ?

Fair enough. Did not think about the boot cpu part.

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/