linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/9] dmaengine: dw-edma: Add HDMA remote interrupt configuration

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: <20230620093201.33vmdmgczwma5iat@mobilestation.baikal.int>
Date:   Tue, 20 Jun 2023 12:32:01 +0300
From:   Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
To:     Köry Maincent <kory.maincent@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Cai Huoqing <cai.huoqing@...ux.dev>,
        Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        Gustavo Pimentel <Gustavo.Pimentel@...opsys.com>,
        dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] dmaengine: dw-edma: Add HDMA remote interrupt
 configuration

On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 08:16:47PM +0200, Köry Maincent wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 00:48:00 +0300
> Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > Seems reasonable especially seeing there is a code with a similar
> > semantic in the dw_hdma_v0_core_write_chunk() method.
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
> > 
> > Just curious whether we really need to have the local IRQs left
> > enabled for the remote device setup... The only case I have in mind is
> > that it would be useful to signal a remote end-point host of such
> > event in some application-specific environment. It sounds exotic but
> > still possible.
> 
> Thanks for your review.
> Yes, we do need to let local IRQs enabled. I have tested to remove them and it
> prevent the remote setup to function correctly on my board. Maybe it needs to be
> set to know internally when the transfer is done, but it seems weird. I haven't
> a full explanation for now.

Ok. Thanks for checking it out.

-Serge(y)