linux-kernel - Re: [patch V2a 35/45] genirq/manage: Rework irq_set_irq

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5af489ef-0e47-4895-a714-4a4eb68517aa@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 08:14:03 +0100
From: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
 "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V2a 35/45] genirq/manage: Rework irq_set_irq_wake()


On 13/05/2025 23:55, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, May 13 2025 at 18:32, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> On 30/04/2025 13:48, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> @@ -846,45 +846,40 @@ static int set_irq_wake_real(unsigned in
>>>     */
>>>    int irq_set_irq_wake(unsigned int irq, unsigned int on)
>>>    {
>>> -	unsigned long flags;
>>> -	struct irq_desc *desc = irq_get_desc_buslock(irq, &flags, IRQ_GET_DESC_CHECK_GLOBAL);
>>> -	int ret = 0;
>>> +	scoped_irqdesc_get_and_lock(irq, IRQ_GET_DESC_CHECK_GLOBAL) {
>>
>>
>> I noticed a suspend regression on some of our Tegra boards and bisect
>> pointed to this commit. I made the following change and this does appear
>> to fix it ...
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/irq/manage.c b/kernel/irq/manage.c
>> index 2861e11acf3a..c94837382037 100644
>> --- a/kernel/irq/manage.c
>> +++ b/kernel/irq/manage.c
>> @@ -846,7 +846,7 @@ static int set_irq_wake_real(unsigned int irq,
>> unsigned int on)
>>     */
>>    int irq_set_irq_wake(unsigned int irq, unsigned int on)
>>    {
>> -       scoped_irqdesc_get_and_lock(irq, IRQ_GET_DESC_CHECK_GLOBAL) {
>> +       scoped_irqdesc_get_and_buslock(irq, IRQ_GET_DESC_CHECK_GLOBAL) {
>>                   struct irq_desc *desc = scoped_irqdesc;
>>                   int ret = 0;
>>
>> Hence, I wanted to ask if this should still be using the buslock scope here?
> 
> Of course. My bad. Care to send a patch with a proper change log?

Yes no problem! Thanks for confirming.

Jon

-- 
nvpublic