linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] irq/irq_sim: provide irq_sim_fire

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMRc=Me6bGaGiiwvGNXbcr+fxarYsrgH-3MhQpSKjOjKQ6BtTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:01:37 +0100
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] irq/irq_sim: provide irq_sim_fire_type()

wt., 29 sty 2019 o 10:07 Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> napisał(a):
>
> Hello Bartosz,
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 09:44:05AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > -void irq_sim_fire(struct irq_sim *sim, unsigned int offset)
> > +void irq_sim_fire_type(struct irq_sim *sim,
> > +                    unsigned int offset, unsigned int type)
> >  {
> >       struct irq_sim_irq_ctx *ctx = irq_sim_get_ctx(sim, offset);
> >
> > -     if (ctx->enabled) {
> > +     /* Only care about relevant flags. */
> > +     type &= IRQ_TYPE_SENSE_MASK;
> > +
> > +     if (ctx->enabled && (ctx->type & type)) {
> >               set_bit(offset, sim->work_ctx.pending);
> >               irq_work_queue(&sim->work_ctx.work);
> >       }
> >  }
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_sim_fire);
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(irq_sim_fire_type);
>
> This looks better than the previous variant. I wonder if it would be
> still more sensible to have type only in the mockup driver. But I don't
> have the complete picture here and it might be easier this way.
>

I'm afraid I don't follow. Wasn't that the way it was done in v1?

Bart