linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 11/24] RISC-V: ACPI: irqchip/riscv-intc: Add ACPI 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]

Date:   Wed, 8 Feb 2023 21:49:40 +0000
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@...osinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/24] RISC-V: ACPI: irqchip/riscv-intc: Add ACPI support

Hey Sunil,

On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 11:52:12PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> Add support for initializing the RISC-V INTC driver on ACPI based
> platforms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>

> +static int __init
> +riscv_intc_acpi_init(union acpi_subtable_headers *header,
> +		     const unsigned long end)
> +{
> +	int rc;
> +	struct fwnode_handle *fn;
> +	struct acpi_madt_rintc *rintc;
> +
> +	rintc = (struct acpi_madt_rintc *)header;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * The ACPI MADT will have one INTC for each CPU (or HART)
> +	 * so riscv_intc_acpi_init() function will be called once
> +	 * for each INTC. We only need to do INTC initialization
> +	 * for the INTC belonging to the boot CPU (or boot HART).
> +	 */
> +	if (riscv_hartid_to_cpuid(rintc->hart_id) != smp_processor_id())
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	fn = irq_domain_alloc_named_fwnode("RISCV-INTC");
> +	WARN_ON(fn == NULL);

Is there a reason that you do not just check this as !fn?

> +	if (!fn) {

This is a repeated check from the WARN_ON(), no?

> +		pr_err("unable to allocate INTC FW node\n");

Why do you need a WARN_ON() & the pr_err() here?

> +		return -1;

Why not an actual ERRNO?

Cheers,
Conor.

> +	}
> +
> +	rc = riscv_intc_init_common(fn);
> +	if (rc) {
> +		pr_err("failed to initialize INTC\n");
> +		return rc;
> +	}
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -IRQCHIP_DECLARE(riscv, "riscv,cpu-intc", riscv_intc_init);
> +IRQCHIP_ACPI_DECLARE(riscv_intc, ACPI_MADT_TYPE_RINTC,
> +		     NULL, 1, riscv_intc_acpi_init);
> +#endif
> -- 
> 2.38.0
> 

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)