linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq/irq_sim: provide irq_sim_fire

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMRc=MczHf3Q+826QDMMNAFU3WMKHR3L-Tj=Da4ydVRDcZThCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 2 Dec 2018 18:00:22 +0100
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] irq/irq_sim: provide irq_sim_fire_edge()

niedz., 2 gru 2018 o 13:29 Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com> napisał(a):
>
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 23:26:25 +0100
> Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 7:14 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
> >
> > > Thomas, Linus: after commit fa38869b0161 ("gpiolib: Don't support irq
> > > sharing for userspace") some libgpiod tests are failing because we can
> > > no longer depend on reading the value of a dummy GPIO after detecting
> > > an interrupt to know the edge of the interrupt. While these interrupts
> > > are triggered from debugfs and debugfs is not required to maintain
> > > compatibility, I thing having a working test suite for the GPIO
> > > subsystem and uAPI is worth applying these two patches and also the
> > > previous one[1].
> > >
> > > Can we have them applied for 4.20 or are there any objections?
> >
> > I'm fine with applying them if I can just get an ACK from one of the IRQ
> > maintainers (Thomas, Marc).
>
> I'm fine with that patch, with the provision that (nitpick) the edge
> field is turned into a bool instead of an int.
>
> With that,
>
> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
>

I wanted to reuse the already existing IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING/FALLING
defines which I think makes more sense here than a boolean.

Bart