linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] gpio: about the need to manage irq mapping dynamically.

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:   Fri, 30 Jun 2017 00:16:12 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
Cc:     Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        "open list:ARM/Amlogic Meson..." <linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] gpio: about the need to manage irq mapping dynamically.

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-06-29 at 16:14 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:

>> So I changed my mind, it is fine for this type of driver to call
>> irq_create_mapping() in gpio_to_irq(). Preferably with some comment
>> around the call.
>
> What about disposing of the mapping ? there still is no counter part function to
> gpio_to_irq. It seems weird to leave them lying around, don't you think ?

Yeah that sucks. We need a way to fix that.

Is gpio_irq_prepare/unprepare the right approach?

Yours,
Linus Walleij