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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <83fa65c8-3442-ee26-22ed-e26b013cca14@quicinc.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Oct 2021 09:27:55 +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 10/15/2021 9:09 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-10-13 19:26:55)
>> 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.
> I mean handle_bad_irq() on the irqdesc for the spmi pmic arb chained
> irq. Because things are not good with the chained irq.
Okay, how about this, Update periph_interrupt() function with a return
value, and return -EINVAL once an invalid IRQ is detected. In
pmic_arb_chained_irq(), call handle_bad_irq() if periph_interrupt()
returned -EINVAL.