[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 0/6] irqdomain, gpio: expand irq_domain_push_irq() for DT use and use it for GPIO
Hi Marc.

2017-09-07 21:39 GMT+09:00 Marc Zyngier <>:
>> I think there is a possibility where a device tries to get IRQ
>> after irq_domain_create_hierarchy(), but before irq_domain_push_irq().
>> priv->domain = irq_domain_create_hierarchy(...)
>> if (!priv->domain)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>> [ *** What if a irq consumer device request the irq here? *** ]
> We've explicitly forbidden such a use case. There is a (not exactly fool
> proof) check in irq_domain_push_irq(), but it is pretty easy to bypass
> it. "Don't do it" is the conclusion we reached with David Daney.
> If you don't want these interrupts to be requested, you might as well
> flag them as IRQ_NOREQUEST, and unflag them when the hierarchy is ready.
> Would that work for you?

Sorry if my description was unclear.

I do not think IRQ_NOREQUEST is equivalent
to IRQ_DOMAIN_FLAG_NO_CREATE I am trying to add in 5/6.

My intention is to prevent platform_get_irq()
from allocating a new virq.

I think IRQ_NOREQUEST only affects request_irq().

Having said that, this series got negative response
as a whole.

My motivation is to get my GPIO driver (6/6) in
by hook or by crook.
If you do not like this series, please feel free to throw it away.

Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-08 17:08    [W:0.230 / U:2.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site