linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: add a generic control interface

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: <20111020024556.GD32007@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net>
Date:	Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:45:56 +0800
From:	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
CC:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>,
	Linaro Dev <linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] pinctrl: add a generic control interface

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 04:04:29PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > @@ -113,6 +204,10 @@ extern struct pinctrl_dev *pinctrl_register(struct pinctrl_desc *pctldesc,
> ...
> > +extern int pin_config(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, int pin,
> > +		      enum pin_config_param param, unsigned long data);
> > +extern int pin_config_group(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, const char *pin_group,
> > +			    enum pin_config_param param, unsigned long data);
> 
> Hmmm. Do we really want to expose these as public APIs? I suppose it
> will allow us to start configuring all these parameters ASAP, but all
> previous discussion has been aimed at having the pinctrl core set up an
> initial set of values at boot-time using a board-supplied table (so no
> external API), and then we were still talking about how to manipulate
> the values at run-time. Do we really want to encode all this information
> into drivers calling these APIs?
> 
+1

We should not require device driver to call these APIs directly.  There
are so many pinctrl subsystem internal details left to its users.

The Stephen's proposal [1] about adding a new param into pinmux_enable()
to specify pin configuration is much preferred to me.

Regards,
Shawn

[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/137341

--
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/