linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: meson-gxl: add tsin

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: <1496930716.3552.47.camel@baylibre.com>
Date:   Thu, 08 Jun 2017 16:05:16 +0200
From:   Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
To:     Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
        Carlo Caione <carlo@...one.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: meson-gxl: add tsin_a pins

On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 15:58 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 08.06.2017 um 15:53 schrieb Jerome Brunet:
> > On Thu, 2017-06-08 at 15:49 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote:
> > > Am 08.06.2017 um 15:09 schrieb Jerome Brunet:
> > > > Add Tsin A pins to bank DV and X.
> > > > We don't have a driver for the tsin yet but since the tsin A pinmux is
> > > > enabled by default at boot time, declaring this pinmux is required to
> > > > properly operate on GPIOX.
> > > > 
> > > > Without this change, GPIOX 8, 9, 10 and 11 can't be driven as GPIO
> > > > output
> > > > as the tsin A seems to have priority.
> > > 
> > > Should this get a Fixes header then for stable backports?
> > 
> > Nothing is wrong with what is already in. This is merely an addition.
> 
> Your above description of not being able to use GPIOs on e.g. the GXL
> based Khadas Vim devboard sounded like a bug to me.

As far as I know, the affected pins (GPIOX 8 to 11) are used for BTPCM, not
GPIOs, on all supported designs, including the Vim. 

> 
> > If we go that way, all commit to this file should have a Fixes to the
> > initial commit. This seems a bit extreme to me ...
> 
> Thought it might have been just an oversight.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andreas
>