linux-kernel - [patch 2.6.22-rc1] gpio interface loosens call restrictions

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 14 May 2007 19:16:28 -0700
From:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
To:	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [patch 2.6.22-rc1] gpio interface loosens call restrictions

Loosen gpio_{request,free}() and gpio_direction_{in,out}put() call context
restrictions slightly, so a common idiom is no longer an error:  board init
code setting up spinlock-safe GPIOs before tasking is enabled.

The issue was caught by some paranoid code with might_sleep() checks.  The
legacy platform-specific GPIO interfaces stick to spinlock-safe GPIOs, so
this change reflects current implementations and won't break anything.

Signed-off-by: David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>

---
 Documentation/gpio.txt |    8 ++++++--
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- osk.orig/Documentation/gpio.txt	2007-05-12 21:18:56.000000000 -0700
+++ osk/Documentation/gpio.txt	2007-05-13 09:35:27.000000000 -0700
@@ -113,7 +113,9 @@ setting up a platform_device using the G

 The return value is zero for success, else a negative errno.  It should
 be checked, since the get/set calls don't have error returns and since
-misconfiguration is possible.  (These calls could sleep.)
+misconfiguration is possible.  You should normally issue these calls from
+a task context.  However, for spinlock-safe GPIOs it's OK to use them
+before tasking is enabled, as part of early board setup.

 For output GPIOs, the value provided becomes the initial output value.
 This helps avoid signal glitching during system startup.
@@ -199,7 +201,9 @@ However, many platforms don't currently 

 Passing invalid GPIO numbers to gpio_request() will fail, as will requesting
 GPIOs that have already been claimed with that call.  The return value of
-gpio_request() must be checked.  (These calls could sleep.)
+gpio_request() must be checked.  You should normally issue these calls from
+a task context.  However, for spinlock-safe GPIOs it's OK to request GPIOs
+before tasking is enabled, as part of early board setup.

 These calls serve two basic purposes.  One is marking the signals which
 are actually in use as GPIOs, for better diagnostics; systems may have
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/