linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] irqchip/gic*: Complain about the use of IRQ_TYPE

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: <0c775a8f-07a8-3904-13cf-162a7f23ef49@arm.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:46:20 +0000
From:   Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] irqchip/gic*: Complain about the use of IRQ_TYPE_NONE

On 16/03/18 16:39, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 16/03/18 16:19, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 16/03/18 14:55, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> Grepping through the dts files, the documentation, and reviewing
>>> patches, one can only notice the use of IRQ_TYPE_NONE in interrupt
>>> specifiers. At least for the GIC, this doesn't mean anything. The
>>> unsuspecting driver will end-up with whatever was there before, and
>>> there is a 50% probability that it is not what it wants.
>>>
>>> I'd love to fix it myself, but I also have a 50% probability of
>>> getting it wrong. In order to make the user aware they are walking on
>>> thin ice, let's add some warnings. Hopefully, they'll be annoying
>>> enough that people will fix their firmware. Croudsourcing debugging...
>>
>> I guess there's also the alternative nuclear option of breaking their
>> build ;)
>>
>> Robin.
>>
>> ----->8-----
>> diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h
>> b/include/dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h
>> index a8b310555f14..de79af80d01e 100644
>> --- a/include/dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h
>> +++ b/include/dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/irq.h
>> @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
>>    #ifndef _DT_BINDINGS_INTERRUPT_CONTROLLER_IRQ_H
>>    #define _DT_BINDINGS_INTERRUPT_CONTROLLER_IRQ_H
>>
>> -#define IRQ_TYPE_NONE		0
>> +#define IRQ_TYPE_NONE		"This is nonsense and needs fixing"
>>    #define IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING	1
>>    #define IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING	2
>>    #define IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH	(IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_FALLING | IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING)
>>
> 
> What really annoys me with this patch is that you haven't put a SoB on it...

On a more serious note, though, it dawns on me that this might be 
something DTC could realistically scream about for us, although I guess 
not all irqchip bindings include a type specifier so it would probably 
need to special-case known ones.

Robin.