linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 15/17] arm64: Remove custom IRQ stat accounting

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: <jhjmu47kupx.mognet@arm.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Jul 2020 20:58:50 +0100
From:   Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 15/17] arm64: Remove custom IRQ stat accounting


On 24/06/20 20:58, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Let's switch the arm64 code to the core accounting, which already
> does everything we need.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/hardirq.h |  9 ---------
>  arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c          | 24 ++++++------------------
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> index ed8a8184e3b6..8b903ceef2be 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/smp.c
> @@ -991,7 +979,7 @@ void __init set_smp_ipi_range(int ipi_base, int n)
>               int err;
>
>               err = request_percpu_irq(ipi_base + i, ipi_handler,
> -					 "IPI", &irq_stat);
> +					 "IPI", &cpu_number);

That pointer remains unused in ipi_handler(); I suppose it's just a matter
of cosmetics? I see that we leave it as irq_stat in arm, I suppose simply
because we don't have a cpu_number equivalent there and need *some* percpu
variable for the request to happen.

>               WARN_ON(err);
>
>               ipi_desc[i] = irq_to_desc(ipi_base + i);