[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <10505.1492519386@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 13:43:06 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Rottmann <JRottmann@...PERTEmbedded.de>,
Andres Salomon <dilinger@...ued.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/38] Annotate hardware config module parameters in drivers/clocksource/
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > > > Btw, is it possible to use IRQ grants to prevent a device that has limited
> > > > IRQ options from being drivable?
> > >
> > > What do you mean with 'IRQ grants' ?
> >
> > request_irq().
>
> I still can't parse the sentence above. If request_irq() fails the device
> initialization fails. If you request the wrong irq then request_irq() might
> succeed but the device won't work.
I was talking about having using a driver to make request_irq() grant an irq
to that driver so that another driver can't bind to its device because all its
irq options are taken and the irqs can't be shared.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists