Messages in this thread | | | From | "Tian, Kevin" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH 1/7] vfio/pci: Disable auto-enable of exclusive INTx IRQ | Date | Fri, 8 Mar 2024 07:23:21 +0000 |
| |
> From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> > Sent: Friday, March 8, 2024 4:24 AM > > On Thu, 7 Mar 2024 08:39:16 +0000 > "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com> wrote: > > > > From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 7, 2024 5:15 AM > > > > > > Currently for devices requiring masking at the irqchip for INTx, ie. > > > devices without DisINTx support, the IRQ is enabled in request_irq() > > > and subsequently disabled as necessary to align with the masked status > > > flag. This presents a window where the interrupt could fire between > > > these events, resulting in the IRQ incrementing the disable depth twice. > > > This would be unrecoverable for a user since the masked flag prevents > > > nested enables through vfio. > > > > > > Instead, invert the logic using IRQF_NO_AUTOEN such that exclusive INTx > > > is never auto-enabled, then unmask as required. > > > > > > Fixes: 89e1f7d4c66d ("vfio: Add PCI device driver") > > > Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> > > > > CC stable? > > I've always found that having a Fixes: tag is sufficient to get picked > up for stable, so I typically don't do both. If it helps out someone's > process I'd be happy to though. Thanks, >
According to "Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst":
Note: Attaching a Fixes: tag does not subvert the stable kernel rules process nor the requirement to Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org on all stable patch candidates. For more information, please read Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst.
Probably it's fine as long as the stable kernel maintainers don't complain. 😊
| |