linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH 1/2] irqchip: cdx-bus: add cdx-MSI domain with gic-its domain as parent

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <DM6PR12MB3082D9CA3ABEFC2BDAD7E40AE89F9@DM6PR12MB3082.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Aug 2022 12:11:43 +0000
From:   "Gupta, Nipun" <Nipun.Gupta@....com>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "okaya@...nel.org" <okaya@...nel.org>,
        "Anand, Harpreet" <harpreet.anand@....com>,
        "Simek, Michal" <michal.simek@....com>,
        "Agarwal, Nikhil" <nikhil.agarwal@....com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 1/2] irqchip: cdx-bus: add cdx-MSI domain with gic-its
 domain as parent

[AMD Official Use Only - General]



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 4:09 PM
> To: Gupta, Nipun <Nipun.Gupta@....com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org;
> gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; rafael@...nel.org; tglx@...utronix.de;
> okaya@...nel.org; Anand, Harpreet <harpreet.anand@....com>; Simek,
> Michal <michal.simek@....com>; Agarwal, Nikhil
> <nikhil.agarwal@....com>
> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] irqchip: cdx-bus: add cdx-MSI domain with gic-
> its domain as parent

<snip>

> > > > +static int __init its_cdx_msi_init(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +     its_cdx_of_msi_init();
> > > > +
> > > > +     return 0;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +early_initcall(its_cdx_msi_init);
> > >
> > > I really don't think we should have any more of this muck. Yes, the
> > > other busses are also doing that, but here's our chance to do
> > > something better.
> > >
> > > Why can't the *bus* driver (I assume there is one) perform these
> > > tasks? It would really help if this patch was shown in context,
> > > because I have no idea how this fits in the grand scheme of things.
> >
> > Agree, bus driver could do this stuff, and I was considering it too,
> > but as this was the norm so added these changes in this IRQ chip :).
> 
> Well, let's not miss this opportunity to improve things! :-)
> 
> > Bus driver is not out yet, and we have pushed these as RFC changes
> > for early feedback (mentioned in the cover letter), but yes, these
> > patches would be clubbed as a part of overall changes.
> >
> > And we can move it as a part of bus driver itself. I hope that suits?
> 
> It certainly sounds better than the above looks! Please Cc me on the
> submission of this infrastructure.

Sounds good!! Then we will move this inside the bus infra itself and would
add you as a reviewer for the bus series.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
>         M.
> 
> --
> Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.

On a lighter note, on the earlier mail I thought this was a comment for the
patch, as this change matches where norm is bus drivers adding domain in IRQ
chip, but now it seems this is the tagline you have :)

Thanks,
Nipun