linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rtc: Fix missing IRQF_ONESHOT as only threaded handler

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:   Fri, 16 Apr 2021 11:13:49 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To:     zhuguangqing83@...il.com, Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
Cc:     linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: Fix missing IRQF_ONESHOT as only threaded handler

On 16/04/2021 04:19, zhuguangqing83@...il.com wrote:
> From: Guangqing Zhu <zhuguangqing83@...il.com>
> 
> Coccinelle noticed:
> 1. drivers/rtc/rtc-s5m.c:810:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 2. drivers/rtc/rtc-rk808.c:441:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 3. drivers/rtc/rtc-max77686.c:779:7-27: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 4. drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c:415:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 5. drivers/rtc/rtc-lp8788.c:277:8-33: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 6. drivers/rtc/rtc-max8998.c:283:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 7. drivers/rtc/rtc-rc5t583.c:241:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 8. drivers/rtc/rtc-max8997.c:495:7-32: ERROR: Threaded IRQ with no primary
>    handler requested without IRQF_ONESHOT
> 
> Signed-off-by: Guangqing Zhu <zhuguangqing83@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-lp8788.c   | 2 +-
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-max77686.c | 4 ++--
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-max8997.c  | 2 +-
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-max8998.c  | 3 ++-
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-rc5t583.c  | 2 +-
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-rk808.c    | 2 +-
>  drivers/rtc/rtc-s5m.c      | 4 ++--

The commit msg suggests in misleading way that there is an issue here to
solve but at least for max* and s5m it is not true. These are nested
interrupts.

I tested *only* the S5M:
Tested-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>

but still I wonder - why this change is needed, except satisfying blind
Coccinelle runs? Does it really bring benefit for the nested interrupts?


Best regards,
Krzysztof