linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: uniphier: add UniPhier GPIO controller driver

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:   Tue, 8 Aug 2017 10:06:45 +0900
From:   Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: uniphier: add UniPhier GPIO controller driver

Hi Linus,

2017-08-08 0:37 GMT+09:00 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>:
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:50 PM, Masahiro Yamada
> <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote:
>
>> Adding "interrupts" property in DT causes
>> of_pupulate_default_populate() to assign virtual IRQ numbers
>> before driver probing.  So it does not work well with IRQ domain hierarchy.
>
> I think I heard some noise about this the week before.
>
>> For pinctrl/stm32/pinctrl-stm32.c,
>> I do not see "interrupts", so it just straight maps the irq numbers.
>
> I think OMAP and DaVinci does someting similar too. This is from a recent
> DaVinci patch from Keerthy:
>
> +Example for 66AK2G:
> +
> +gpio0: gpio@...3000 {
> +       compatible = "ti,k2g-gpio", "ti,keystone-gpio";
> +       reg = <0x02603000 0x100>;
> +       gpio-controller;
> +       #gpio-cells = <2>;
> +       interrupts = <GIC_SPI 432 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 433 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 434 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 435 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 436 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 437 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 438 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 439 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>,
> +                       <GIC_SPI 440 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
> +       interrupt-controller;
> +       #interrupt-cells = <2>;
> +       ti,ngpio = <144>;
> +       ti,davinci-gpio-unbanked = <0>;
> +       clocks = <&k2g_clks 0x001b 0x0>;
> +       clock-names = "gpio";
> +};
>
>
> That looks fairly similar.
>

I do not think so.


I do not see .alloc hook in drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c
so this driver is unrelated to IRQ domain hierarchy.






-- 
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada