netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] bnx2x: handle spurious interrupts

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20130327.173411.1818933306949379388.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 27 Mar 2013 17:34:11 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	yuvalmin@...adcom.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ariele@...adcom.com, eilong@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bnx2x: handle spurious interrupts

From: "Yuval Mintz" <yuvalmin@...adcom.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:08:17 +0000

> The real issue (well, both are real but this is the one THIS patch
> tries solving, while the one you describe is the one I've named
> `orthogonal') is that there exists a scenario in which the HW
> generates an interrupt although it's configured not to do so, and
> the bnx2x driver shouldn't ACK but rather discard it.

Then I'd rather you test for this situation in a cheap and explicit
manner instead of "pointer is NULL, datastructures not setup yet,
must be spurious."

Actually, in drivers, the handling of spurious interrupts is probably
the domain in which I see the most poorly thought out and implemented
patches.
--
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