linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl info description

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: <1515400974.5048.58.camel@baylibre.com>
Date:   Mon, 08 Jan 2018 09:42:54 +0100
From:   Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
To:     Yixun Lan <yixun.lan@...ogic.com>,
        Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
Cc:     Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Carlo Caione <carlo@...one.org>,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Xingyun Chen <xingyu.chen@...ogic.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] ARM64: dts: meson-axg: uart: Add the pinctrl
 info description

On Mon, 2018-01-08 at 14:07 +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > (the following question just came up while I was looking at this
> > patch, but I guess it's more a question towards the pinctrl driver)
> > the name of the function looks a bit "weird" since below you are also
> > using "uart_ao_b"
> 
> you right here, it's a question related to pinctrl subsystem.
> from my point of view, it's even weird from the hardware perspective:
>  that, the UART function of AO domain route the pin of EE domain..
> 
> > did you choose "uart_ao_b_gpioz" here because we cannot have the same
> > function name for the periphs and AO pinctrl or is there some other
> > reason?
> > 
> 
> Current there is a conflict in the code level which both two pinctrl
> tree (EE, AO) are using the same macro[1] to expand the definitions, so
> there would be conflict symbol if we name both as 'uart_ao_b'
> 
> I think your idea of having an uniform function 'uart_ao_b' for both
> pinctrl subsystem is actually possible/positive..
> 
> I will think about your suggestion and come up with a patch later,
> thanks a lot!
> 
> 
> [1] drivers/pinctrl/meson/pinctrl-meson.h
> 
> #define FUNCTION(fn)                                                    \
>         {                                                               \
>                 .name = #fn,                                            \
>                 .groups = fn ## _groups,                                \
>                 .num_groups = ARRAY_SIZE(fn ## _groups),                \
>         }

The name feels weird because it should have been uart_ao_b_z ... We missed it in
the initial review. Except for correcting the function name, I don't think this
justify a change a pinctrl