linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers: misc: add gpio wakeup 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]

Date:	Fri, 11 Oct 2013 14:54:24 +0200
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Daniel Mack <zonque@...il.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: misc: add gpio wakeup driver

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Daniel Mack <zonque@...il.com> wrote:

>> Since what the driver will then eventually provide is to
>> flag an IRQ line as wakeup, I wonder if this should not just
>> simply go into the interrupt core, or atleast of/irq.c.
>
> But for that, the IRQ line must be requested exclusively and handled as
> well, no? If not, how would you handle cases where an interrupt is
> marked as wakeup source by the core, but used by another driver which
> calls disable_irq_wake() on it for whatever reason?

Does this driver handle that?

It rather looks like it hogs both the GPIO and IRQ from anyone
else who want it...

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/