linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] irqchip/irq-mst: Support polarity configuration

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:   Sun, 7 Mar 2021 02:06:51 +0900
From:   Daniel Palmer <daniel@...f.com>
To:     Mark-PK Tsai <mark-pk.tsai@...iatek.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Daniel Palmer <daniel@...ngy.jp>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, yj.chiang@...iatek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irqchip/irq-mst: Support polarity configuration

Hi Mark-PK,

I'm trying to understand the logic behind the changes.
It seems like the polarity of interrupts is always the same between
the MStar intc and the GIC? Low level interrupts are handled in the
mstar intc and become high level interrupts to the GIC?
I think for the Mstar MSC313(e) and SigmaStar chips all of the
internal interrupts are high level so I never noticed this behaviour.
I can't remember seeing anything that handled this in the MStar kernel
code I looked at.
Is this specific to a certain chip or does it apply for everything
with this intc?
The register values being lost if the chip goes into suspend to memory
makes sense for the MStar chips too I think as everything that is not
in the "pmsleep" register group seems to be lost.

Thanks,

Daniel