linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 1/3] irqchip: add C-SKY irqchip drivers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 20 Sep 2018 13:47:14 +0800
From:   Guo Ren <ren_guo@...ky.com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, jason@...edaemon.net, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/3] irqchip: add C-SKY irqchip drivers

Hi Marc,

On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 04:41:22PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > +#define IPI_IRQ	15
> > +
> 
> It feels really bizarre that the function that maps the interrupt is
> specific to the interrupt controller, and yet the interrupt number is
> defined at the architecture level. I'd expect this to be just as
> interrupt controller specific.
>
Ok, move IPI_IRQ to irq-csky-mpintc.c. See my PATCH V8


> > +	irq = arch_ipi_irq_mapping();
> 
> How about checking the validity of the interrupt and that
> arch_ipi_irq_mapping is actually non-NULL?
Ok. 

> > -	rc = request_percpu_irq(IPI_IRQ, handle_ipi, "IPI Interrupt", &ipi_dummy_dev);
> > +	rc = request_percpu_irq(irq, handle_ipi, "IPI Interrupt", &ipi_dummy_dev);
> >  	if (rc)
> >  		panic("%s IRQ request failed\n", __func__);
>
> To be honest, I'd tend to question the need for this level of
> abstraction, unless you actually plan for multiple SMP-capable
> interrupt controllers... But at the end of the day, that's your call,
> and the above code looks mostly correct.
Thx for the review. I will consider your suggestion.

Best Regards
 GUo Ren