linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] pinctrl: mvebu: kirkwood pinctrl driver

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: <50559737.8000705@gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 16 Sep 2012 11:09:11 +0200
From:	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Lior Amsalem <alior@...vell.com>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
	Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@...ethink.co.uk>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 03/10] pinctrl: mvebu: kirkwood pinctrl driver

On 09/16/2012 09:46 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> +Required properties:
>> +- compatible: "marvell,88f6180-pinctrl",
>> +              "marvell,88f6190-pinctrl", "marvell,88f6192-pinctrl",
>> +              "marvell,88f6281-pinctrl", "marvell,88f6282-pinctrl"
>> +
>> +This driver supports all kirkwood variants, i.e. 88f6180, 88f619x, and 88f628
>
> The current MPP code determines for itself what chip it is running on.
> It can then check if a pin configuration is valid for the current
> run time environment.
>
> Here you are suggesting we have to put into the DT what chip we expect
> to be on.
>
> What is the advantage of this, over getting the information from the
> device itself?

Hi Andrew,

there is no advantage over determining the variant on run time except
that it is statically and (normally) known at boot time. I understand
that mass converting kirkwood to pinctrl would require to know all
the different variants.

If there are no objections from the others, I agree to determine the
variant from the existing kirkwood_id(). I was just unsure if it is
ok to use platform-specific code with DT here.

Any ideas how to get kirkwood_id() linked into pinctrl-kirkwood with
the get-rid-of-arch-includes policy?

Sebastian
--
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/