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  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:   Sun, 23 Aug 2020 10:03:07 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <>
Cc:     LKML <>,,
        Marc Zyngier <>, Megha Dey <>,
        Dave Jiang <>,
        Alex Williamson <>,
        Jacob Pan <>,
        Baolu Lu <>,
        Kevin Tian <>,
        Dan Williams <>,
        Joerg Roedel <>,,,
        Haiyang Zhang <>,
        Jon Derrick <>,
        Lu Baolu <>,
        Wei Liu <>,
        "K. Y. Srinivasan" <>,
        Stephen Hemminger <>,
        Steve Wahl <>,
        Dimitri Sivanich <>,
        Russ Anderson <>,,
        Bjorn Helgaas <>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <>,
        Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <>,, Juergen Gross <>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <>,
        Stefano Stabellini <>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>
Subject: Re: [patch RFC 38/38] irqchip: Add IMS array driver - NOT FOR MERGING

On Sat, Aug 22 2020 at 20:05, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2020 at 03:34:45AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> As a silicon design it might work, but it means existing devices can't
> be used with this dev_msi. It is also the sort of thing that would
> need a standard document to have any hope of multiple vendors fitting
> into it. Eg at PCI-SIG or something.

Fair enough.

>> If you don't do that then you simply can't write to that space from the
>> CPU and you have to transport this kind information always via command
>> queues.
> Yes, exactly. This is part of the architectural design of the device,
> has been for a long time. Has positives and negatives.

As always and it clearly follows the general HW design rule "we can fix
that in software".

>> > I suppose the core code could provide this as a service? Sort of a
>> > varient of the other lazy things above?
>> Kinda. That needs a lot of thought for the affinity setting stuff
>> because it can be called from contexts which do not allow that. It's
>> solvable though, but I clearly need to stare at the corner cases for a
>> while.
> If possible, this would be ideal, as we could use the dev_msi on a big
> installed base of existing HW.

I'll have a look, but I'm surely not going to like the outcome.



Powered by blists - more mailing lists