linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: mockup: fix indicated direction

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: <CAMRc=MfY7c21NOBNnVgXKimywXHFifwek5B76Y_3DgmM_hBbgw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Nov 2018 18:23:01 +0100
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Bamvor Jian Zhang <bamv2005@...il.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: mockup: fix indicated direction

pt., 9 lis 2018 o 18:03 Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> napisał(a):
>
> Hello Bartosz,
>
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 04:24:10PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > pt., 9 lis 2018 o 15:39 Uwe Kleine-König
> > <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> napisał(a):
> > > On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 02:53:16PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > pt., 9 lis 2018 o 14:10 Uwe Kleine-König
> > > > <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de> napisał(a):
> > > > > Which test failed exactly?
> > > >
> > > > All gpioinfo tests that check the output of this command and expect to
> > > > see input as line direction.
> > >
> > > This wasn't the answer I expected. The background of my question was:
> > > This failing test seems to expect that a given GPIO is an input. If that
> > > expectation already exists after the gpio is only requested, then the
> > > test is broken and a fix is necessary there.
> >
> > The test is only expected to work with gpio-mockup which is a dummy
> > testing module. I believe its behavior should be as deterministic as
> > possible to the point where newly created chips always have the same
> > direction.
>
> Given that the initial direction of a GPIO isn't fixed in my eyes the
> test should be able to cope with both possibilities. I'd say it's a bug
> in the test if it doesn't.
>

As I said before: it is and should be fixed in this specific case.
This isn't real hardware.

Bart