linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 02/15 v5] gpio: Add sysfs support to block GPIO API

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:	Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:55:48 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	w.sang@...gutronix.de, jbe@...gutronix.de, plagnioj@...osoft.com,
	highguy@...il.com, broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	daniel-gl@....net, rmallon@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 02/15 v5] gpio: Add sysfs support to block GPIO API

On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de> wrote:

> [Me]
>> The block GPIO stuff is just following that design pattern.
>
> So what do you think about my just proposed idea of always having the
> "value" argument present, but only useable when "exported" is "1"? Now
> only talking about the block gpios, but later maybe also for gpios?

We should atleast be consistent and do it the same way for
blocks as individual gpios.

> But I would only do this if you and Greg consider it reasonable.

I'm still afraid of this whole thing and would seek Grant's consent.

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/