linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: samsung: Calculate GPIO base for pinctrl_add_gpio

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

Message-ID: <20170321093220.GV6986@localhost.localdomain>
Date:   Tue, 21 Mar 2017 09:32:20 +0000
From:   Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
CC:     Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
        "linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl: samsung: Calculate GPIO base for
 pinctrl_add_gpio_range

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 08:39:15PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 04:49:09PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 08:20:11PM +0900, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > > Hi Charles,
> > > 
> > > 2017-03-01 2:04 GMT+09:00 Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>:
> > > > As the pinctrl is now added before the GPIOs are registered we need to
> > > > manually calculate what the GPIO base will be, otherwise the base for
> > > > each gpio_range will be set to zero. Fortunately the driver
> > > > already assigns a GPIO base, in samsung_gpiolib_register, and uses the
> > > > same calculation it does for the pin_base. Meaning the two will always
> > > > be the same and allowing us to reuse the pinbase and avoid the issue.
> > > 
> > > Sorry, I didn't notice before and I don't see the offending patch in ,
> > > but you should add
> > > 
> > > Fixes: XXXXXXXXXXXX ("pinctrl: Patch subject")
> > > 
> > > if you intend to submit this patch separately. Otherwise, maybe this
> > > can be just squashed?
> > > 
> > 
> > Yeah apologies for that as the original patch hasn't showed up in
> > the tree yet I couldn't pull a commit ID to add the fixes tag.
> > Squashing it in is probably the best way to go.
> 
> Hi Charles,
> 
> Thanks for the work.
> 
> This is a follow up of:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9577147/
> Right?
> 
> None of these two were applied so can you squash them, rebase, retest
> and send again?
> 

Yeah no problem should be able to resend later today hopefully.

Thanks,
Charles