linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] gpio: gpio-wcove: fix GPIO irq status mask

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, 20 Apr 2017 17:52:36 -0700
From:   sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy Natarajan <sathyaosid@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] gpio: gpio-wcove: fix GPIO irq status mask

Hi Andy,

Thanks for the review.


On 04/19/2017 01:41 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 8:29 PM,
> <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> According to Whiskey cove PMIC spec, bit 7 of GPIOIRQ0_REG belongs to
> cove -> Cove
Will fix it in next version.
>
>> battery IO. So we should skip this bit when checking for GPIO irq pending
> irq -> IRQ
Ditto.
>
>> status. Otherwise, wcove_gpio_irq_handler() might go into the infinite
>> loop until irq "pending" status becomes 0. This patch fixes this issue.
> Ditto.
>
>> +#define GPIO_IRQ0_MASK         0x7f
>> +#define GPIO_IRQ1_MASK         0x3f
> GENMASK()
Ditto.
>
>> -               pending = p[0] | (p[1] << 8);
>> +               pending = (p[0] & GPIO_IRQ0_MASK) |
>> +                       ((p[1] & GPIO_IRQ1_MASK) << 7);
> I would leave this on one line despite 80 characters limit (actually
> how long is it?).
It comes to 84 characters. Should I leave it as it is ?
>

-- 
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Android kernel developer