linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: make of_get_named_gpiod

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 14 May 2014 11:11:46 +0900
From:	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: make of_get_named_gpiod_flags() private

On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:23 PM, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 10:17 PM, Linus Walleij
> <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 5:45 AM, Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com> wrote:
>>
>>> of_get_named_gpiod_flags() is visible and directly usable by GPIO
>>> consumers, but it really should not as the gpiod interface relies
>>> on the simpler gpiod_get() to provide properly-configured GPIOs.
>>>
>>> of_get_named_gpiod_flags() is just used internally by gpiolib to
>>> implement gpiod_get(), and by the old of_get_named_gpio_flags()
>>> function, therefore it makes sense to make it gpiolib-private.
>>>
>>> As a side-effect, the unused (and unneeded) of_get_gpiod_flags()
>>> inline function is also removed, and of_get_named_gpio_flags() is moved
>>> from a static inline function to a regular one in gpiolib-of.c
>>>
>>> This results in all references to gpiod_* functions in of_gpio.h being
>>> gone, which is the way it should be since this file is part of the old
>>> integer GPIO interface.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
>>
>> This patch broke a lot of drivers so I had to take it out again...
>
> That's unexpected - what happens with it?

I double-checked the patch and tested it on some ARM boards, couldn't
find anything wrong during compilation and runtime. Would appreciate
some specifics about what broke so I can address the issue.

Thanks,
Alex.
--
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/