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]
Date:	Thu, 05 Dec 2013 18:49:56 +0200
From:	Kevin Bracey <kevin@...cey.fi>
To:	Tomasz Figa <t.figa@...sung.com>
CC:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Kyungmin Park <kmpark@...radead.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
	Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: samsung: Allow pin value to be initialized using
 pinfunc.

On 05/12/2013 17:11, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> On Thursday 05 of December 2013 15:07:47 Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 03, 2013 at 10:29:42AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>>
>>> So a suggested patch to support weak hogs would be interesting
>>> to look at. Can you provide details on how you think this would
>>> work?
>> Or should we be going and applying the default state to all devices on
>> init without worrying about a driver appearing?
> If a device isn't used, then it's often better to configure the pins for
> a different function, such as GPIO, to minimize leakage current.
>

And there can also be mutually-exclusive drivers choosing different 
default states for the same pin. I think you do need a separate "safe" 
indicator.

My current thought is that  a late-init "make safe all unclaimed pins" 
pass would make sense - you can't really mess with pins in an automated 
fashion on init, as it can mess up bootloader->driver handover.   There 
already exist late-init "turn off all unclaimed clocks" (at least on 
shmobile) and "turn off all unclaimed regulators", and it would fit that 
model.

Kevin

--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ