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: <20211021055810.4ivtscmg2rs5dtt4@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Thu, 21 Oct 2021 11:28:10 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Jie Deng <jie.deng@...el.com>
Cc:     Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@...s.com>, wsa@...nel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel@...s.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: virtio: fix completion handling

On 21-10-21, 13:55, Jie Deng wrote:
> Can the backend driver control the time point of interrupt injection ? I
> can't think of
> 
> why the backend has to send an early interrupt. This operation should be
> avoided
> 
> in the backend driver if possible. However, this change make sense if early
> interrupt
> 
> can't be avoid.

The backend driver probably won't send an event, but the notification
event, if it comes, shouldn't have side effects like what it currently
have (where we finish the ongoing transfer by calling complete()).

-- 
viresh

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ