linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] genirq: avoid long loops in handle_edge

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:   Thu, 19 Oct 2023 15:02:33 +0800
From:   Wei Gong <gongwei833x@...il.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] genirq: avoid long loops in handle_edge_irq

O Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 10:44:36AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12 2023 at 21:39, Wei Gong wrote:
> > O Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 04:32:10PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> Now $COND is not true due to the affinity change and the edge handler
> >> returns. As a consequence nothing acks the device and no further
> >> interrupts are sent by the device.
> >> 
> >> That might not be true for your case, but that's a generic function and the
> >> zoo of hardware which uses that is massive.
> >> 
> >> So no, we are not taking a risk here.
> >> 
> >> Thanks,
> >> 
> >>         tglx
> >> 
> >>     
> > By maintaining the original loop exit condition, if a mask mismatch is 
> > detected within the loop, we will not perform the unmask_irq operation. 
> > Instead, we will wait until the loop exits before executing unmask_irq.
> > Could this approach potentially solve the issue of lost interrupts?
> 
> How so exactly?
> 

View attachment "p.diff.txt" of type "text/plain" (832 bytes)