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:   Wed, 23 Aug 2017 10:16:13 +0800
From:   jeffy <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com>
To:     Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
CC:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bhelgaas@...gle.com, shawn.lin@...k-chips.com,
        dianders@...omium.org, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] PCI: rockchip: Add support for pcie wake irq

Hi Brian,

On 08/23/2017 09:57 AM, Brian Norris wrote:
> Hi Jeffy,
>
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 09:32:39AM +0800, Jeffy Chen wrote:
>> and for eage irq, maybe we should enable it right after(or before)
>> the driver activate wake function(for example activate WOWLAN or
>> WOLAN), otherwise would it be possible to miss some irqs(triggered
>> before we actually enable the wake irq)?
>
> I already mentioned this: for the PCI case, the specification explicitly
> says that the WAKE# pin must remain asserted until the system wakes and
> resets the link. So we don't have this problem.
Sorry, i means for other use cases of wakeirq, for example sdio wifi

>
> But it is probably still useful to make sure there's a well-defined
> point at which these interrupts are armed, so that if a device driver
> does care, it can account for that. Just before suspend_noirq (as it is
> today) is probably fine, so if there's some device-level handling that
> needs to happen before we get to suspend (but after the wakeirq is
> armed), it can go in the device or bus {suspend,resume}_noirq callbacks.

Yes, then we may need to handle "disable level irq" job in the irq 
handler(or runtime resume callback as current wakeirq API suggested) for 
irqs received before suspend devices irqs.
>
> Brian
>
>
>


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ