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: <CAHp75Vd==vnSo7P2kozDrPdu+1WB8O3fck3ELbK4aAqW9tvppQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Jun 2017 12:29:32 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     "Mani, Rajmohan" <rajmohan.mani@...el.com>
Cc:     Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] gpio: Add support for TPS68470 GPIOs

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:17 PM, Mani, Rajmohan
<rajmohan.mani@...el.com> wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] gpio: Add support for TPS68470 GPIOs
>> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 04:40:16PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> >> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi> wrote:

>> >> > Again, I'm not really worried about this driver, but the ACPI
>> >> > tables. How does the difference show there?
>> >>
>> >> Same way. You will have common numbering over the chip [0, 9]. It
>> >> will be just an abstraction inside the driver.

>> > Sounds fine to me, taken that this does not add complications to ACPI
>> > tables.
>>
>> They just need to share the same ACPI_HANDLE (it might require to do this in
>> generic way in gpiolib) and have a continuous numbering (easy to achieve with
>> carefully chosen bases).

> Few clarifications...
>
> Are you implying new kernel changes are needed in gpiolib to accommodate 2 GPIO chips?

Might be needed. It should be investigated first.
In any case it would be somelike oneliner.

> Does it need changes in platform firmware or is it expected to work just with the gpiolib changes that you described above?

No firmware changes are implied.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ