linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 01/11] MFD: DA9052 MFD core module v8

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: <C3AE124F08223B42BC95AEB82F0F6CED1F9CFD44@KCHJEXMB01.kpit.com>
Date:	Sun, 4 Dec 2011 11:50:02 +0000
From:	Ashish Jangam <Ashish.Jangam@...tcummins.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC:	"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
	"sameo@...nedhand.com" <sameo@...nedhand.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dajun <dajun.chen@...semi.com>,
	"linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 01/11] MFD: DA9052 MFD core module v8


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Brown [mailto:broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 7:33 PM
> To: Ashish Jangam
> Cc: arnd@...db.de; sameo@...nedhand.com; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> Dajun; linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] MFD: DA9052 MFD core module v8
> 
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 01:57:49PM +0000, Ashish Jangam wrote:
> > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 02:49:54PM +0530, Ashish Jangam wrote:
> 
> > > > + * Interrupt controller support for Dilaog DA9052 PMICs.
> 
> > > This looks very much like it could be replaced with regmap-irq.  The
> > > code would be slightly less efficient due to the support for sparse
> > > interrupt registers but it'd be less code.
> 
> > regmap-irq has a opaque struct regmap_irq_chip_data which has a member
> > irq_base and this is required for non-primary irqs registration
> > and also the clean-up function regmap_del_irq_chip() requires it.
> > So as of now I will keep the current irq implementation as it is.
> 
> I'm not sure how this is relevant to my above comment?  The struct is of
> course opaque since it is only used by the implementation.
No issues on that but it has got irq_base as its member which gets initialize in the
function regmap_add_irq_chip() and since this member value is not available
to the user how can the mfd dependent modules like touch, battery etc can register
for interrupt because during irq registration we add irq_base to the irq nmber for
e.g. irq_base + battery_irq