linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] irqchip/sifive-plic: Add support for Renesas RZ/Five SoC

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: <20220629134147.GA16868@duo.ucw.cz>
Date:   Wed, 29 Jun 2022 15:41:47 +0200
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Sagar Kadam <sagar.kadam@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] irqchip/sifive-plic: Add support for Renesas
 RZ/Five SoC

Hi!

> > >> +#define PLIC_QUIRK_EDGE_INTERRUPT      BIT(0)
> > >>
> > >>  struct plic_priv {
> > >>         struct cpumask lmask;
> > >>         struct irq_domain *irqdomain;
> > >>         void __iomem *regs;
> > >> +       u32 plic_quirks;
> > >>  };
> > >>
> > >> What about something like above?
> > >
> > > LGTM.
> > >
> > > Marc suggested to make this unsigned long, but TBH, that won't make
> > > much of a difference.  PLICs are present on RV32 SoCs, too, so you
> > > cannot rely on having more than 32 bits anyway.
> >
> > But it will make a difference on a 64bit platform, as we want to
> > use test_bit() and co to check for features.
> >
> Ok will change that to unsigned long and use the test_bit/set_bit instead.

Is there good enough reason for that? test_bit/... are when you need
atomicity, and that's not the case here. Plain old & ... should be
enough.

Best regards,
								Pavel
-- 
People of Russia, stop Putin before his war on Ukraine escalates.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (196 bytes)