linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 1/3] Input: twl4030-pwrbutton

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:16:22 +0200
From:	Florian Vaussard <florian.vaussard@...l.ch>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
	Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@...aro.org>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 1/3] Input: twl4030-pwrbutton - add device tree support

Hello,

On 10/24/2013 10:38 AM, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi Florian,
>
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:47:33AM +0200, Florian Vaussard wrote:
>>> +Required SoC Specific Properties:
>>> +- compatible: should be one of the following
>>> +   - "ti,twl4030-pwrbutton": For controllers compatible with twl4030
>>> +- interrupt: should be one of the following
>>> +   - <8>: For controllers compatible with twl4030
>>
>> This is <8> for your particular case, but it will depend on your
>> SoC, won't it?  Moreover, this property will be most likely
>> inherited from the root twl node, so I do not see the need to
>> document it here. See:
>>
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/twl-familly.txt
>
> No. This is an internal twl4030 interrupt. TWL4030 functions
> itself as an interrupt controller.
>

So if it does not belong to the TWL parent, where is it used in your code?
You should be parsing this property, so you can set up the IRQ properly.
I am a bit confused here. If it is fixed, no need for a OF property.

>>> +
>>> +Example:
>>> +	twl_pwrbutton: pwrbutton {
>>> +		compatible = "ti,twl4030-pwrbutton";
>>> +		interrupts = <8>;
>>> +	};
>>
>> You are missing the root twl node here, no?
>
> So should I document it like this?
>

IMHO it is more clear for the user.

> twl4030 {
>     compatible = "ti,twl4030";
>
>     pwrbutton {
>         compatible = "ti,twl4030-pwrbutton";
>         interrupts = <8>;
>     };
> };

Nit, but existing documentations follow the "name@...ress"
form for the root node, as the TWL is on an I2C bus.
Either it is already defined, thus you should use "&twl4030"
to reference it, or you create the TWL node and something like
"twl4030@48" should be used.

For an example, you can refer to existing bindings, like
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/twl4030-audio.txt.

Best regards,

Florian
--
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/