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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 17:07:58 +0100 From: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com> To: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Phidias Chiang <phidias.chiang@...onical.com>, Anisse Astier <anisse@...ier.eu>, Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>, Yu C Chen <yu.c.chen@...el.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] gpiolib: Add possibility to mask which GPIOs are added to IRQ domain Mika, On 15/09/16 16:52, Mika Westerberg wrote: > When using GPIO irqchip helpers to setup irqchip for a gpiolib based > driver, it is not possible to select which GPIOs to add to the IRQ domain. > Instead it just adds all GPIOs which is not always desired. For example > there might be GPIOs that for some reason just cannot be used as interrupts > at all. > > To make this possible we add valid_mask to each gpio_chip and by default > assume all GPIOs can be used as interrupts. Drivers can then tune this > using clear_bit() or similar before they call gpiochip_irqchip_add(). > > Suggested-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> > Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > include/linux/gpio/driver.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > index 53ff25ac66d8..d84c23b47f44 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > @@ -1186,6 +1186,18 @@ int gpiochip_add_data(struct gpio_chip *chip, void *data) > if (status) > goto err_remove_chip; > } > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_GPIOLIB_IRQCHIP > + chip->valid_mask = kcalloc(BITS_TO_LONGS(chip->ngpio), sizeof(long), > + GFP_KERNEL); Do we really want to make this a mandatory thing? In most cases, I'd expect this valid_mask to have all bits set, so you might as well not allocate it at all in that case (and only allocate it if you actually need it). > + if (!chip->valid_mask) > + return -ENOMEM; You really want to revise your error handling here. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists