linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i2c: i801: Register optional lis3lv02d i2c device on Dell machines

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]

Message-ID: <20170104111817.663236ae@endymion>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2017 11:18:17 +0100
From:   Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>
To:     Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>
Cc:     Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
        Michał Kępień 
        <kernel@...pniu.pl>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Steven Honeyman <stevenhoneyman@...il.com>,
        Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
        Jochen Eisinger <jochen@...guin-breeder.org>,
        Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@...il.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Mario_Limonciello@...l.com,
        Alex Hung <alex.hung@...onical.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: i801: Register optional lis3lv02d i2c device on
 Dell machines

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 10:06:41 +0100, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> On Dec 29 2016 or thereabouts, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > So 4d5538f5882a is breaking lis3lv02d driver...
> 
> Apologies for that.
> 
> I could easily fix this by adding a kernel API to know whether the
> provided irq is from Host Notify or if it was coming from an actual
> declaration. However, I have no idea how many other drivers would
> require this (hopefully only this one).
> 
> One other solution would be to reserve the Host Notify IRQ and let the
> actual drivers that need it to set it, but this was not the best
> solution according to Dmitri. On my side, I am not entirely against this
> given that it's a chip feature, so the driver should be able to know
> that it's available.
> 
> Dmitri, Wolfram, Jean, any preferences?

I did not look at your work so I do not feel qualified to give advice
on the proper way. I trust you to make the right decision :-)

-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support