netdev - Re: [Uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH 1/5] netdev: bfin_mac: Blackfin EMAC interrupt may not be shared

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: <8bd0f97a0905290422x502d6006yb05ebe231b05e9bc@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 29 May 2009 07:22:05 -0400
From:	Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	Michael.Hennerich@...log.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org
Subject: Re: [Uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH 1/5] netdev: bfin_mac: Blackfin EMAC 
	interrupt may not be shared

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 07:14, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Hennerich, Michael" <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>
>> Our handler isn't prepared to handle such fake interrupts.
>> So two options:
>> 1) Set the proper IRQF flags.
>> 2) Fix the ISR to handle spurious interrupts.
>>
>> This patch chose option 1)
>
> And to go back to my initial reply, I'm saying to do the
> "right thing" and go with #2 if you can :-)

and the answer is that doesnt make sense.  why implement extra over
head in an interrupt handler to support an operating mode the hardware
can never support.  if the IRQ could actually be shared, then sure, we
should check things.  but it cant, so you're suggesting we waste time
in an IRQ handler for absolutely no gain.
-mike
--
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