linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH v1 1/9] spmi: pmic-arb: add a print in cleanup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 14 Oct 2021 10:26:55 +0800
From:   Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@...cinc.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <collinsd@...eaurora.org>, <subbaram@...eaurora.org>,
        Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v1 1/9] spmi: pmic-arb: add a print in cleanup_irq


On 10/14/2021 3:35 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-10-12 21:15:42)
>> On 10/13/2021 1:46 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-09-16 23:32:56)
>>>> From: Abhijeet Dharmapurikar <adharmap@...eaurora.org>
>>>>
>>>> The cleanup_irq() was meant to clear and mask interrupts that were
>>>> left enabled in the hardware but there was no interrupt handler
>>>> registered for it. Add an error print when it gets invoked.
>>> Why? Don't we get the genirq spurious irq message in this scenario?
>> Thanks for reviewing the change.
>>
>> No, there is no existing message printed out in this special case ( IRQ
>> fired for not registered interrupt).
> Ah I see so the irq doesn't have a flow handler? Shouldn't you call
> handle_bad_irq() in this case so we get a irq descriptor print?
In such case, the irq number is not valid and there won't be a valid
irq_desc, hence it's not possible to call handle_bad_irq() here.