linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: mfd: Remove TPS65217 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 13 Dec 2016 08:24:47 +0900
From:   Milo Kim <woogyom.kim@...il.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     bcousson@...libre.com, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: mfd: Remove TPS65217 interrupts

On 12/13/2016 02:25 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 03:28:31PM +0900, Milo Kim wrote:
>> Interrupt numbers are from the datasheet, so no need to keep them in
>> the ABI. Use the number in the DT file.
> I don't see the purpose of ripping this out. The headers have always
> been for convienence, not whether the values come from the datasheet or
> not.

My understanding is it's a same rule as other interrupt controllers.
I'd like to have Arnd's opinion for this.

Best regards,
Milo