linux-kernel - Re: Re: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mailbox: pcc: support polling mode when there is no platform 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: <20251209-singing-organic-jackal-b8f2ec@sudeepholla>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2025 11:11:37 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Andrea Tomassetti <andrea.tomassetti@...earl.com>
Cc: "jassisinghbrar@...il.com" <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
	"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"lkp@...el.com" <lkp@...el.com>,
	"oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev" <oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev>,
	Olivier Dautricourt <Olivier.Dautricourt@...earl.com>,
	"olivierdautricourt@...il.com" <olivierdautricourt@...il.com>,
	"rafael@...nel.org" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Thibault Cantori <thibault.cantori@...earl.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mailbox: pcc: support polling mode when
 there is no platform IRQ

On Tue, Dec 09, 2025 at 10:39:53AM +0000, Andrea Tomassetti wrote:
> On 25/12/04 01:14PM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > 
> > I wouldn't consider that as real platform especially if it is not std. AEM
> > models that are well maintained. Many Fast models are short lived and never
> > maintained long term, so I don't want to push any feature based on that alone
> > unless you have a real platform with missing or broken interrupt that needs
> > this polling feature.
> > 
> > It is burden for long term maintenance if there is no regular way to test this
> > polling mode feature.
> > 
> Fair, I totally get your point. Thank you very much for your time.
> 

Thanks for understanding. We can always revisit this if this becomes a
requirement on a real platform in the future. I am not against that just FYI.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep