linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] spmi: pmic-arb: revert "validate type when mapping IRQ"

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: <CACRpkdab=MFffe27qK5qFo1kAKcZOOeGDkEwwHa3HF+EEq0qeQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Feb 2019 15:38:38 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] spmi: pmic-arb: revert "validate type when mapping IRQ"

Hi Brian,

I simply applied this patch to the pin control tree so we get it
in with the rest of the patches.

On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 1:36 PM Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org> wrote:

> Validation of the IRQ type was added to spmi pmic-arb, however spmi-mpp
> in device tree still uses IRQ_TYPE_NONE. This commit caused the
> spmi-mpp probe to fail since platform_irq_count() would return 0.
> Correct this by backing out the previous patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>
> Fixes: 135ef21ab064 ("spmi: pmic-arb: validate type when mapping IRQ")
> ---
> Linus: I think that the better longer-term approach is to just embed the
> IRQ counts similar to what is now in spmi-gpio.

That is most certainly better.

> Since we are getting
> close to the end of the dev cycle, I think it is safer to just drop
> the old patch for the time being. I'll commit to doing that work for the
> next dev cycle, although I can send you that change this weekend if you
> prefer that we go that route instead.

It's fine like this.

> My ssbi-gpio series does not have this issue.

OK!

Yours,
Linus Walleij