linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] irqchip: irq-ti-sci-inta: Allocates VINTs at probe

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: <87jzym64kg.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date:   Sat, 08 Apr 2023 11:39:27 +0100
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To:     Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
Cc:     Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] irqchip: irq-ti-sci-inta: Allocates VINTs at probe

On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 16:04:26 +0100,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com> wrote:
> 
> Simplify driver by allocating all VINTs at probe instead of
> allocating on IRQ request. This will allow dedicating few VINTs as
> direct IRQs without aggregation in future.

I think this is going in the wrong direction. Eager allocation is
wasting memory, slowing down boot, and in general a bad idea.

Why can't you just pre-allocate *one* interrupt that serves as a
chained handler for everything, and then use the rest of the interrupt
space for "direct" interrupts?

	M.

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