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: <CACRpkdZBbcL87Hq94sFYdDOWnC7S_JGtArTNMimAps663UQNgw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Sep 2016 14:39:47 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        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 Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 02:46:01PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> > I'm going to re-read the hardware spec and see if there is anything we
>> > can do about this. The newer hardware (Skylake, Broxton) has a bit that
>> > tells the IRQ is routed directly to I/O-APIC but unfortunately Braswell
>> > misses that. There may be something else, though.
>>
>> So as far as we can determine:
>>
>> (A) we are running on Braswell and
>> (B) we are probing this driver
>>
>> we can conclude that
>>
>> (C) IRQs A,B,C are reserved by BIOS?
>>
>> That sounds doable?
>
> Yes, it's doable but that requires some hard coding in the driver :-/

>From my point of view that is the lesser of two evils.

We only have hard-coding (syntactic) madness over having
behaviour-dependent (semantic) madness.

Yours,
Linus Walleij