linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] i2c: Add irq_gpio field to struct i2c_client, i2c_board

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]

Message-ID: <4E609F9C.5020403@cam.ac.uk>
Date:	Fri, 02 Sep 2011 10:19:24 +0100
From:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>
To:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
CC:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Chew <achew@...dia.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
	spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/5] i2c: Add irq_gpio field to struct i2c_client,
 i2c_board_info.

On 09/02/11 07:56, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Stephen,
> 
> Can you please fix your e-mail client / system / whatever so that your
> patch series are no longer sent duplicated?
> 
> On Thu,  1 Sep 2011 16:04:27 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> Some devices use a single pin as both an IRQ and a GPIO. In that case,
>> irq_gpio is the GPIO ID for that pin. Not all drivers use this feature.
>> Where they do, and the use of this feature is optional, and the system
>> wishes to disable this feature, this field must be explicitly set to a
>> defined invalid GPIO ID, such as -1.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> v3: Also add the field to i2c_board_info, and copy the field from
>>     i2c_board_info to i2c_client upon instantiation
> 
> I don't get the idea. The i2c core doesn't make any use of the field,
> and that field will only be used by a few drivers amongst the 420+
> i2c drivers in the tree. This looks like a waste of memory. What's wrong
> with including the new field in the private platform or arch data
> structure for drivers which need it?
Why not make it platform data for now and 'if' it becomes way more common
(probably won't) we can always propose adding as a general field at a later
date.


--
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/