linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] pinctrl: handle dummy state in core

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: <CACRpkdYH06_kGbSdozKPWZcOG0FvoOyHvjHwhz-xUL1pfSX9DQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2012 13:31:17 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@...escale.com>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Dong Aisheng-B29396 <B29396@...escale.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linus.walleij@...ricsson.com" <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] pinctrl: handle dummy state in core

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 5:42 AM, Dong Aisheng
<aisheng.dong@...escale.com> wrote:

> I think the main issue is for one platform neither supports dt nor using pinctrl
> subsystem, do you think it still makes too much sense to force that platform
> to define a _PINCTRL_ dummy state in their machine code?
>
> But the driver is commonly shared between these different platforms(using pinctrl
> or not).

So this is for the situation where some machines have pinctrl and some haven't.

And I think that's how some archs have used the regulator dummies earlier,
so I clearly see the point. So if converting a subset of machines in an
architecture you will need this for a transitional period.

Is this helpful to get i.MX support in place?

On one hand I'd say we merge it for that reason alone, instead of requiring
all i.MX machines to be converted at once.

On the other hand, I fear that this will be used to avoid *ever* migrating
the old machines to pinctrl. And it's a generic disease that people working
in the arch/arm/* tree want to ditch old hardware without actually deleting
the code.

I'd like Sascha's view on this to make a good decision.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/