linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] genirq: Clarify that irq wake state is orthogonal to enable/disable

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]

Date:   Fri, 07 Feb 2020 21:33:40 +0100
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Lina Iyer <ilina@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] genirq: Clarify that irq wake state is orthogonal to enable/disable

Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> writes:
>> Thomas also mentioned that hardware could work either way and probably
>> should not be assumed to work one way or the other.
>
> Right...
>
> ...and then (paraphrasing) Stephen pointed out that policy makes it
> really hard for clients of the API to work properly.
>
> ...and then (paraphrasing) Thomas said "Good point.  As long as you
> document that not all drivers _actually_ behave the way you describe,
> it's fine to add a comment saying that drivers _should_ behave the way
> you describe".
>
> Or, said another way: if a driver doesn't behave the way Stephen
> describes then it should be fixed unless there is some reason why
> there is no possible way to make it happen.

Yes, that's right.

Thanks,

        tglx