linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] mfd: bd71837: Devicetree bindings for ROHM BD71837 PMIC

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Thu, 31 May 2018 13:23:15 +0300
From:   Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To:     Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        lee.jones@...aro.org, lgirdwood@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mikko.mutanen@...rohmeurope.com,
        heikki.haikola@...rohmeurope.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] mfd: bd71837: Devicetree bindings for ROHM
 BD71837 PMIC

On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 10:17:17AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> Hello Rob,
> 
> Thanks for the review!
> 
> On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 10:01:29PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:42:03AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > > Document devicetree bindings for ROHM BD71837 PMIC MFD.
> > > + - interrupts		: The interrupt line the device is connected to.
> > > + - interrupt-controller	: Marks the device node as an interrupt controller.
> > 
> > What sub blocks have interrupts?
> 
> The PMIC can generate interrupts from events which cause it to reset.
> Eg, irq from watchdog line change, power button pushes, reset request
> via register interface etc. I don't know any generic handling for these
> interrupts. In "normal" use-case this PMIC is powering the processor
> where driver is running and I do not see reasonable handling because
> power-reset is going to follow the irq.
> 

Oh, but when reading this I understand that the interrupt-controller
property should at least be optional.

Br,
    Matti Vaittinen