linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] 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: <CAAhSdy2PSLjrtmSbkJ4w-v-zWm2hjii3XL6HE5Pe7u3wz4BmZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Sep 2018 22:08:58 +0530
From:   Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        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>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] irqchip: RISC-V Local Interrupt Controller Driver

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:05 PM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 10:02:09PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
>> You are thinking very much in-context of SiFive CPUs only.
>
> No.  I think in terms of the RISC-V spec.  I could care less about
> SiFive to be honest.
>
>> Lot of SOC vendors are trying to come-up with their own CPUs
>> and RISC-V spec does not restrict the use of local interrupts.
>
> Yes, it does.
>
>> The mie/mip/sie/sip/uie/uip are all machine word size so on
>> riscv64 we can theoretically have maximum 64 local interrupts.
>
> They could in theory IFF someone actually get the use case through
> the riscv privileged spec working group.

Their is no point in having each and every possible local interrupts
defined by RISC-V spec because some of these will be CPU
implementation specific in which case these local interrupts will
be described in platform specific DT passed to Linux.

Regards,
Anup