linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] pinctrl: resurrect verbose pinmux-pins

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, 2 Mar 2012 09:22:14 -0800
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@...aro.org>,
	Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@...aro.org>,
	Rajendra Nayak <rajendra.nayak@...aro.org>,
	Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...vell.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] pinctrl: resurrect verbose pinmux-pins

Linus Walleij wrote at riday, March 02, 2012 9:31 AM:
> From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> 
> This reintroduces the verbosity in the pinmux-pins file, now this
> file will list all pins, their names, owning device (and if it's
> a hog) and also in applicable cases the function and group making
> use of that pin right now.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>

It'd be nice if we could defer this fix until after all the API rework,
because it'll cause all kinds of conflicts otherwise.

The type "struct pinmux_group" you added to struct pin_desc is removed by
patches in my series. If this patch goes in before my series, it'd be best
if it just stored the char* for the function instead of that type, so the
rework by my patche series will be smaller.

I don't think it make sense to store a "group" as owning a pin; each pin
should be part of one muxing group as defined by the hardware so there isn't
a concept of "which group acquired the pin", just "which function is
programmed on the pin". Even if multiple "virtual groups" contain a pin
(which I think would be a bad idea) then the important information from a
HW perspective is the function and not the arbitrary group name.

-- 
nvpublic

--
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/