linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] i2c: smbus: Handle stuck alerts

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: <ZqdNE2nFEmRU2y-l@shikoro>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 10:04:35 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] i2c: smbus: Handle stuck alerts


> > I think this can only work if we require .alert-handlers to start with a
> > sanity check to make sure their device really raised an interrupt
> > condition. And then return either -EBUSY or 0, similar to IRQ_HANDLED or
> > IRQ_NONE. Or?
> 
> I think so, but I am not sure if it is worth the effort. It would require
> changing the API, and each driver supporting alert callbacks would have
> to implement code to detect if it actually got an interrupt.

The more I think about it, the more I like this proposal. I mean, irq
subsystem has IRQ_NONE also for a reason. And we do not have that many
alert handlers to convert. They could all return EBUSY by default
because that is what they currently behave like anyhow. That being said,
it will not be a top priority on my list.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)