linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 4/5] gpio: max77620: Don't handle disabled interrupts

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:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:31:21 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/5] gpio: max77620: Don't handle disabled interrupts

On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 1:54 PM Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com> wrote:
> 08.07.2020 13:11, Andy Shevchenko пишет:

...

> It should be unnecessary since we now see that the handle_nested_irq()
> checks whether interrupt was requested and if it wasn't, then particular
> GPIO interrupt will be treated as spurious [1]. The pending == 0
> condition is an extreme case, I don't think that there is a need to
> optimize it without any good reason.
>
> [1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.8-rc3/source/kernel/irq/chip.c#L485
>
> Hence it should be better to drop this patch.

Fine with me, thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko