linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: sch: Add interrupt support

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: <20190424153317.GN2654@lahna.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 Apr 2019 18:33:17 +0300
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: sch: Add interrupt support

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 04:24:16PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> > I'm trying to say that for the sysfs access (well or char dev) you
> > should not need the sch_sci_handler() thing that is in your current
> > patch.
> 
> Then I'm still missing the black magic where - in my case - CGTS or RGTS are
> read, evaluated and written back.
> 
> And we would still need the gpio-sch driver to handle GGPE, GTNE, GTPE when
> edge events are requested? Is the a reference for /such/ a case? The newer
> Intels must be different then.

I realized the patch does not get an IRQ resource for the device so the
sch_sci_handler() is used to circumvent that. Yeah, if you don't have
IRQ resource available from the device ACPI description then I guess
hooking into ACPI SCI might be sensible thing to do after all...