netdev - Re: [PATCH] phy_device: Interrupt number 0 is valid

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: <20081009.093835.27394691.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:38:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	paulius.zaleckas@...tonika.lt
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy_device: Interrupt number 0 is valid

From: Paulius Zaleckas <paulius.zaleckas@...tonika.lt>
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2008 10:05:03 +0300

> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Paulius Zaleckas <paulius.zaleckas@...tonika.lt>
> > Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:16:32 +0300
> > 
> >> If interrupt number 0(valid interrupt number) will be passed as
> >> phy interrupt it should be used. In current situation even phy
> >> polling will not work since PHY_POLL = -1
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Paulius Zaleckas <paulius.zaleckas@...tonika.lt>
> > 
> > In the Linux kernel, interrupt number 0 is defined as not valid.
> 
> Where it is defined as not valid?
> Maybe it is not valid under x86, but it is valid at least on
> ARM for sure.

There are many tests in the kernel that explicitly assume
that IRQ zero is not valid.

And architectures should make amends to adhere to this
convention, even if physically IRQ 0 is meaningful for them.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html