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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0804052100580.15143@t2.domain.actdsltmp> Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 10:56:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...escale.com> To: David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net> cc: Ben Nizette <bn@...sdigital.com>, Trent Piepho <tpiepho@...escale.com>, Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>, Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mike Frysinger <vapier.adi@...il.com> Subject: Re: userspace GPIO access (WAS: [patch/rfc 2/4] pcf875x ...) On Fri, 4 Apr 2008, David Brownell wrote: > > - Trent's gpio_class exposes all GPIOs, even ones > that are claimed by kernel drivers ... and thus > makes it easy to clobber kernel driver state. This was intentional. When you're developing said kernel drivers, or connecting hardware they're supposed to drive, it's very handy to be able to set and read the GPIOs from userspace. At least, when writing a gpiolib driver and code that used gpiolib, I found this ability very useful, so I thought other developers might as well. I suppose one could make the sys files read-only once a kernel driver allocates a gpio. But it would be nice to have the ability to make them writable, if one really wants that. > (Plus it won't work on most built-in GPIOs, since > they by and large don't have parent devices.) Couldn't they always add one? My GPIO driver is part of the CPU/SoC, and it has a device node. It's pretty easy to add a platform device, and probably cleaner than not associating a device with the gpio driver. >From my understanding of sysfs, it seems any sysfs based approach has to be based on a device. > What I'd like to see is userspace config commands to > cause the gpio_request() ... *maybe* something like Suppose I took the code I had, and make the label file writable? Writing to it allocates the gpio with the written label? That would be relatively simple to add. Is there any reason why the GPIOs should appear in sysfs by default? They are devices, and most other devices appear in sysfs. > Plus, there should be some way to cause gpio_free() too. Write a blank label? Too bad one can't "rm" sysfs files, that would be a neat way to trigger stuff. I can see it used to hot-unplug a pci device, just delete the slot. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists