linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: fixed: support deferred probe for DT GPIOs

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: <4FF1C0D6.3010108@wwwdotorg.org>
Date:	Mon, 02 Jul 2012 09:40:06 -0600
From:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC:	Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] regulator: fixed: support deferred probe for DT GPIOs

On 07/01/2012 12:23 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 10:33:15AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> 
>> of_get_named_gpio() needs the driver hosting the GPIO that the
>> DT property references to have been probed. Detect this specific
>> failure, and defer the probe of the whole regulator until this
>> API can complete.
> 
> I've applied this but...

Thanks.

>> +	/* +	 * of_get_named_gpio() currently returns ENODEV rather
>> than +	 * EPROBE_DEFER. This code attempts to be compatible with
>> both +	 * for now; the ENODEV check can be removed once the API
>> is fixed.
> 
> ...this just seems rubbish, why aren't we just fixing the device
> tree code and why are we doing this at the device tree level rather
> than as a general gpiolib thing?

It is being fixed in the DT code:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/18/468

However, it seemed best to make the regulator code work both before
and after that patch.

This issue can't be fixed only in gpio_request(); of_get_named_gpio()
needs the GPIO driver to be probed/registered to even be able to parse
the GPIO ID out of the DT; it makes a call into the GPIO driver as
part of the parsing. So, the DT code will always have to handle
deferred probe, as well as gpio_request() (for the case where the GPIO
ID came from platform data and hence there was no earlier point where
deferred probed would be detected).
--
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/