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: <fb0ddca3-3b74-8225-914e-d1799f6c3ca3@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2024 18:31:29 -0500
From: Hari Nagalla <hnagalla@...com>
To: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>, Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
        Nick
 Saulnier <nsaulnier@...com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Mathieu
 Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
CC: <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/13] mailbox: omap: Reverse FIFO busy check logic

On 3/25/24 12:20, Andrew Davis wrote:
>   
>   static int omap_mbox_chan_send_noirq(struct omap_mbox *mbox, u32 msg)
>   {
> -	int ret = -EBUSY;
> +	if (mbox_fifo_full(mbox))
> +		return -EBUSY;
>   
> -	if (!mbox_fifo_full(mbox)) {
> -		omap_mbox_enable_irq(mbox, IRQ_RX);
> -		mbox_fifo_write(mbox, msg);
> -		ret = 0;
> -		omap_mbox_disable_irq(mbox, IRQ_RX);
> +	omap_mbox_enable_irq(mbox, IRQ_RX);
> +	mbox_fifo_write(mbox, msg);
> +	omap_mbox_disable_irq(mbox, IRQ_RX);
>   
> -		/* we must read and ack the interrupt directly from here */
> -		mbox_fifo_read(mbox);
> -		ack_mbox_irq(mbox, IRQ_RX);
> -	}
> +	/* we must read and ack the interrupt directly from here */
> +	mbox_fifo_read(mbox);
> +	ack_mbox_irq(mbox, IRQ_RX);
>   
> -	return ret;
> +	return 0;
>   }
Is n't the interrupt supposed to be IRQ_TX above? i.e TX ready signal?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ