linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/16] gpio: Tight IRQ chip integration and banked infrastructure

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:06:35 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
        Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] gpio: Tight IRQ chip integration and banked infrastructure

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 6:57 PM, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:

> On omaps, each bank is a separate driver instance with it's own
> interrupt. Maybe really all we need to do is get rid of the "bank"
> naming, I think that's left over from 15 years ago when we did not
> have separate driver instances. It seems we should s/bank/ddata/
> on the driver to avoid confusion.

OK sorry maybe OMAP is not a target for this, I just thought so
since it was one of the platforms that is patches in the patch
series.

But I'm pretty sure we have chips with banking like this: separate
interrupts but a single device. I would have to read through them
all I guess.

Yours,
Linus Walleij