linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] qcom: spmi-gpio: add support for hierarchical IRQ chip

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190108103545.GB3643@basecamp>
Date:   Tue, 8 Jan 2019 05:35:45 -0500
From:   Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc:     andy.gross@...aro.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        lee.jones@...aro.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        marc.zyngier@....com, shawnguo@...nel.org, dianders@...omium.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, nicolas.dechesne@...aro.org,
        niklas.cassel@...aro.org, david.brown@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, thierry.reding@...il.com,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] qcom: spmi-gpio: add support for hierarchical IRQ
 chip

On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 01:55:42PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > +       ret = pmic_gpio_domain_translate(domain, fwspec, &hwirq, &type);
> > +       if (ret)
> > +               return ret;
> > +
> > +       for (i = 0; i < nr_irqs; i++)
> > +               irq_domain_set_info(domain, virq + i, hwirq + i,
> > +                                   &pmic_gpio_irq_chip, state,
> > +                                   handle_level_irq, NULL, NULL);
> > +
> > +       parent_fwspec.fwnode = domain->parent->fwnode;
> > +       parent_fwspec.param_count = 4;
> > +       parent_fwspec.param[0] = 0;
> > +       parent_fwspec.param[1] = fwspec->param[0] + 0xc0 - 1;
> 
> Is the -1 there twice, once in pmic_gpio_domain_translate() and then
> here?

That should be 'hwirq + c0' to improve the code readability.

Brian