linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V6] gpio: virtio: Add IRQ support

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: <CAHp75VdKn7Sze9HxN0gBgbuQS2K6oB+SQsufw576Rkfg4-osOw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Oct 2021 12:42:05 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@...ux.net>,
        Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
        Bill Mills <bill.mills@...aro.org>,
        Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        "stratos-dev@...lists.linaro.org" <stratos-dev@...lists.linaro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6] gpio: virtio: Add IRQ support

On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 7:34 AM Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 20-10-21, 18:10, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wednesday, October 20, 2021, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
> > wrote:

...

> > > +       case IRQ_TYPE_NONE:
> > > +               type = VIRTIO_GPIO_IRQ_TYPE_NONE;
> > > +               break;
> >
> > IIRC you add dead code. IRQ framework never calls this if type is not set.
>
> Yes, but it is allowed to call
>
> irq_set_irq_type(irq, IRQ_TYPE_NONE);
>
> and the irq framework won't disallow it AFAICT.

That's true, but how you may end up in this callback with a such?
What the meaning of that call to the user?

...

> > >  struct virtio_gpio_config {
> > >         __le16 ngpio;
> > >         __u8 padding[2];
> > > @@ -44,4 +56,17 @@ struct virtio_gpio_response_get_names {
> > >         __u8 value[];
> > >  };
> > >
> > > +/* Virtio GPIO IRQ Request / Response */
> > > +struct virtio_gpio_irq_request {
> > > +       __le16 gpio;
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +struct virtio_gpio_irq_response {
> > > +       __u8 status;
> > > +};
> > >
> > I’m wondering if those above should be packed.
>
> You are talking about the newly added ones or the ones before ?
>
> In any case, they are all already packed (i.e. they have explicit
> padding wherever required) and properly aligned. Compiler won't add
> any other padding to them.

Is it only for 64-bit to 64-bit communications?
If there is a possibility to have 32-bit to 64-bit or vice versa
communication you have a problem.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko