linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: cherryview: Do not mask all interrupts on probe

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: <CACRpkdZRguTg4davCW-x6HvRJgOxNz8R4KyeFCEnQzyXPkP6cg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:18:49 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Phidias Chiang <phidias.chiang@...onical.com>,
        Anisse Astier <anisse@...ier.eu>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yu C Chen <yu.c.chen@...el.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: cherryview: Do not mask all interrupts on probe

On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 3:11 PM, Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 09:04:44PM +0800, Phidias Chiang wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:04:01PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
>> >
>> > OK, I see what is going on now. When I changed handle_simple_irq to
>> > handle_bad_irq, the IRQ core in __irq_do_set_handler() thinks the
>> > handler is uninstalled and masks the line.
>> >
>> > If you change handle_bad_irq to handle_simple_irq, in call to
>> > gpiochip_irqchip_add(), does it work then?
>>
>> Yes it does :), thank you for the support!
>
> Thanks for testing.
>
> So we need to use handle_simple_irq here instead.
>
> Linus, do you see any problems with that?

I need to see the patch in its context with a commit message,
I can't figure it out from the thread.

handle_simple_irq() is for something generic not level- or
edge-triggered. If you support specific triggers only, it
should not be used.

Nominally assigning handle_bad_irq() until a specific
edge or level is requested is the right thing to do, since
the IRQ is really not configured for anything at all and
hence has undefined behaviour.

But write a patch and involve the irqchip people I guess?

Yours,
Linus Walleij