linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: dwapb: Add support for 32 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 10 Apr 2018 16:29:11 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@...esas.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Hoan Tran <hotran@....com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Michel Pollet <michel.pollet@...renesas.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: dwapb: Add support for 32 interrupts

Hi Phil,

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:23 PM, Phil Edworthy
<phil.edworthy@...esas.com> wrote:
> On 10 April 2018 07:24 Phil Edworthy wrote:
>> On 09 April 2018 20:20 Rob Herring wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 03:22:30PM +0100, Phil Edworthy wrote:
> [...]
>> > > +- interrupt-mask : a 32-bit bit mask that specifies which interrupts
>> > > +in the list
>> > > +  of interrupts is valid, bit is 1 for a valid irq.
>> >
>> > This is not a standard property and would need a vendor prefix. However,
>> I'd
>> > prefer you just skip any not connected interrupts with an invalid interrupt
>> > number. Then the GPIO number is the index into "interrupts".
>> Makes sense, I'll rework it to do this.
> Err, what would an invalid interrupt number be?
> If I use -1, I get a DT parsing error and 0 is certainly valid. If the number is
> larger than the valid interrupt range I get errors during probe.

Perhaps using interrupts-extended instead of interrupts?

E.g.

    interrupts-extended = <&intc1 5 1>, <0>, <&intc2 1 0>;

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds