linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 14/16] gpio: Add support for banked GPIO controllers

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: <CACRpkdZ7QwyrqqO8iLXDcDimWk5iwOEKZBvXQ-2mBO5s+vg13A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Sep 2017 15:59:26 +0200
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ext Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/16] gpio: Add support for banked GPIO controllers

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com> wrote:

> From: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
>
> Some GPIO controllers are subdivided into multiple logical blocks called
> banks (or ports). This is often caused by the design assigning separate
> resources, such as register regions or interrupts, to each bank, or some
> set of banks.
>
> This commit adds support for describing controllers that have such a
> banked design and provides common code for dealing with them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>

This patch makes me really happy.

It pulls in a lot of weirdness to the OF core and creates a coherent
way of handling these "banked" GPIO chips.

CC to Tony to make sure he checks that OMAP is ready to use this
too.

I would change num_pins to num_lines everywhere in this patch,
so if you resend the series, please fix that.

> +void gpio_irq_chip_banked_handler(struct irq_desc *desc)

Maybe we should name this gpio_irq_chip_banked_chained_handler()
since it only deals with chained IRQs?

Sooner or later we will have a nested bank too...

Otherwise it looks fine.

Yours,
Linus Walleij