linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: dt-bindings: spi-controller: add wakeup-source and 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:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 15:22:21 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: dt-bindings: spi-controller: add wakeup-source
 and interrupts

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 07:52:22AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:

> if:
>   properties:
>     interrupt-names:
>       contains:
>         const: wakeup
>   required:
>     - interrupt-names
> then:
>   required:
>     - wakeup-source

That seems to say that if we have a device that has an interrupt called
"wakeup" then it must be a wakeup source.  Is that desirable?  Being
able to wake the system is partly a property of the system as a whole
(the wakeup signal needs to be wired somewhere where it can wake things)
and a device might have a signal that could be used to wake the system,
may even be called "wakeup" by the device but for some reason isn't
wired suitably in a given system.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)