linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] irqchip: RISC-V Local Interrupt Controller Driver

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: <20180910133549.GA15730@infradead.org>
Date:   Mon, 10 Sep 2018 06:35:49 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] irqchip: RISC-V Local Interrupt Controller Driver

On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 05:23:07PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> > And we reject that driver approach for good reason and are now
> > doing the architectualy low-level irq handling in common code
> > without any need whatsover to duplicate information in the
> > privileged spec in DT.
> 
> In other words, the whole idea of separate RISCV local interrupt
> controller driver was dropped due duplicate information in privilege
> spec DT ??

No.  We came to the conflusion that a few registers on a cpu
that allow enabling/disabling local vs external vs timer intterupts
aren't worth writing an irqchip (or DT entries) for.