linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: Add Avionic Design N-bit GPIO expander support

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, 10 Aug 2012 10:48:59 +0200
From:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: Add Avionic Design N-bit GPIO expander support

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:41:58AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de> wrote:
> >> Consult the following article on LWN:
> >> http://lwn.net/Articles/470820/
> >>
> >> Then grep your gitlog and you'll see we got rid of it from ARM.
> >
> > Then why is there still the following in arch/arm/include/asm/irq.h?
> >
> >         /*
> >          * Use this value to indicate lack of interrupt
> >          * capability
> >          */
> >         #ifndef NO_IRQ
> >         #define NO_IRQ  ((unsigned int)(-1))
> >         #endif
> 
> That's a question for Russell but I think it's basically there for
> old platforms, on a "don't use it"-basis. (Maybe a comment could
> be good.)
> 
> As you see non-sparse platforms can redefine NO_IRQS in their
> <mach/irqs.h> file, but in practice things like the VIC and GIC
> drivers have been switched over to using irqdomain which
> in turn does *not* allow IRQ 0 to be used, so most platforms
> are indirectly disallowed to use IRQ 0 anyway. In fact I think
> some of them are just broken now.

In that case it might be better to just drop it altogether and wait
until people with the broken platforms start complaining.

Thierry

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped