linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/6] genirq/test: Platform/architecture fixes

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: <efe1d5b3-4288-4f44-bcb3-99326a75a473@roeck-us.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 14:37:00 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>, David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 kunit-dev@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] genirq/test: Platform/architecture fixes

On 8/20/25 10:22, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 03:00:34PM +0800, David Gow wrote:
>> Looks like __irq_alloc_descs() is returning -ENOMEM (as
>> irq_find_free_area() is returning 200 w/ nr_irqs == 200, and
>> CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ=n).
> 
> Thanks for the insight. I bothered compiling my own qemu just so I can
> run m68k this time, and I can reproduce.
> 
> I wonder if I should make everything (CONFIG_IRQ_KUNIT_TEST) depend on
> CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ, since it seems like arches like m68k can't enable
> SPARSE_IRQ, and they can't allocate new (fake) IRQs without it. That'd
> be a tweak to patch 4.
> 
> Or maybe just 'depends on !M68K', since architectures with higher
> NR_IRQS headroom may still work even without SPARSE_IRQ.
> 
>> But all of the other architectures I found worked okay, so this is at
>> least an improvement.
> 
> Thanks for the testing.
> 
I applied the series to my testing branch. I'll run a full test tonight and
report results tomorrow.

Guenter