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, 20 Sep 2016 11:48:20 +0200
From:   Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>, <arnd@...db.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, <bruherrera@...il.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        <lee.jones@...aro.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/9] drivers: irqchip: Add STM32 external interrupts
 support

Hi Thomas,

On 09/14/2016 03:44 PM, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>
>
> On 09/14/2016 03:34 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Alexandre Torgue wrote:
>>> On 09/14/2016 11:19 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Now what really bugs me is that you do that at all. An interrupt
>>>> which is
>>>> freed must be masked already. Why is it unmasked in the first place?
>>>
>>> Honestly I don't know. When "devm_free_irq" is called to release
>>> virq, there
>>> is no issue and interrupt is well masked. But, when I tried to use
>>> "irq_dispose_mapping(virq)" I observed that .free is called (child
>>> and parent
>>> domain) but interrupt is not masked.
>>
>> Well, you just used some function in some context which is not
>> relevant to
>> the normal operation. So adding that mask() is just paranoia for no
>> value.
>
A gentle reminder ping...
If ".free" callback is not relevant then I 'll remove it from exti domain.

> I agree. I just wanted to "force" a test for .free callback. If it not
> relevant I'll remove ".free" callback of exti domain.
> As a part of this series has already been taken by Linus (pinctrl part),
> I will send a new series only for irqchip part (patches [1] and [2]). Do
> you agree ?
>

Thanks in advance
Alex

> Thanks
> Alex
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>     tglx
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel



Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ