linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] Fix sun7i pin assignment for IRQ's

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]

Message-ID: <CACRpkdYmf8-ZPV5q9H3cdZtQDUkbx=bcrVg9a8M3zEAifXxF9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:16:46 +0100
From:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc:	Henry Paulissen <draakje197@...il.com>,
	linux-sunxi <linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com>,
	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
	Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@....com>,
	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@...com>,
	Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
	Hongzhou Yang <hongzhou.yang@...iatek.com>,
	Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] Fix sun7i pin assignment for IRQ's

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 1:54 AM, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com> wrote:
>
> Usually, the patch title should be prefixed by the subsystem it
> applies to so that maintainer and reviewers can spot it more
> easily. In this case, it would be something like
>
> pinctrl: sunxi: Fix sun7i pin assignment for IRQ's
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 06:14:07PM +0100, Henry Paulissen wrote:
>> After testing IRQ pins we found some bugs in the pinctrl declaration.
>> Both PI* and PC* pins didn't work. PI* pins seemed to be connected
>> to the wrong mux and PC* pins waren't working at all.
>>
>> Please note that the A20 soc manual is contradicting between version
>> and even within the same document for both the PI and PC pins.
>
> Which sections are in contradiction?
>
>> Patch is based on testing with the hardware itself.
>
> How did you test it? Using the sysfs API, or did you have any hardware
> connected to it?

I'm taking this patch out of my tree now following Maxime's comments.

I'm a bit annoyed that it is iterating too quickly as well, I will
wait and see for a while.

Yours,
Linus Walleij