linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 04/25] genirq/irqdomain: Add DOMAIN_BUS_DEVICE

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, 15 Feb 2024 16:01:03 +0100
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Paul Walmsley
 <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Rob
 Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski
 <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Frank Rowand
 <frowand.list@...il.com>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Björn Töpel
 <bjorn@...nel.org>, Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>, Andrew Jones
 <ajones@...tanamicro.com>, Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>, Saravana
 Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 04/25] genirq/irqdomain: Add DOMAIN_BUS_DEVICE_IMS

On Thu, Feb 15 2024 at 11:54, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Jan 2024 16:17:32 +0000,
> Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com> wrote:
>>  	DOMAIN_BUS_PCI_DEVICE_IMS,
>> +	DOMAIN_BUS_DEVICE_IMS,
>
> Only a personal taste, but since we keep calling it "device MSI",
> which it really is, I find it slightly odd to name the token
> "DEVICE_IMS".
>
> From what I understand, IMS is PCIe specific. Platform (and by
> extension device) MSI extends far beyond PCIe. So here, DEVICE_MSI
> would make a lot more sense and avoid confusion.

That's true, but I chose it intentionally because Interrupt Message
Store (IMS) is a (PCI) device specific way to store the message contrary
to PCI/MSI[-X] which has standardized storage.

So my thought was that this exactly reflects what the platform device
requires: device specific message store, aka DMS or DSMS :)

> But hey, I don't have much skin in this game, and I can probably
> mentally rotate the acronym...

I have no strong opinion about it though.

Thanks,

        tglx