linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v10 6/7] PCI / PM: Move acpi wakeup code to pci core

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: <20171207001754.GB28152@atomide.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Dec 2017 16:17:54 -0800
From:   Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:     Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Jeffy Chen <jeffy.chen@...k-chips.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, shawn.lin@...k-chips.com,
        dianders@...omium.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v10 6/7] PCI / PM: Move acpi wakeup code to pci core

* Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> [171206 19:36]:
> By the way, it seems pretty ambiguous how we want to handle things like
> (a) multiple devices sharing the same WAKE#
> (b) systems where a slot is swappable
> 
> For (a), the main problem is that if we have to repeat the interrupt
> definition in multiple devices, then we have to deal with something like
> IRQF_SHARED. That can be done, but it makes it much harder to use the
> dedicated wakeirq helpers.

This will get messy, let's not go there :) That is unless the hardware
really has a single interrupt wired to multiple devices. And in that
case almost certainly a custom interrupt handler is needed.

Regards,

Tony