linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] iio: adc: max1027: Make it optional to use interrupts

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: <20191007120122.6d41532f@xps13>
Date:   Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:01:22 +0200
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] iio: adc: max1027: Make it optional to use
 interrupts

Hi Jonathan,

Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote on Sun, 6 Oct 2019 11:18:37
+0100:

> On Thu,  3 Oct 2019 19:33:56 +0200
> Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
> 
> > The chip has a 'start conversion' and a 'end of conversion' pair of
> > pins. They can be used but this is absolutely not mandatory as regular
> > polling of the value is totally fine with the current internal
> > clocking setup. Turn the interrupts optional and do not error out if
> > they are not inquired in the device tree. This has the effect to
> > prevent triggered buffers use though.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>  
> 
> Hmm. I haven't looked a this in a great deal of depth but if we support
> single channel reads it should be possible to allow the use of a
> trigger from elsewhere.  Looks like a fair bit of new code would be needed
> to support that though.  So perhaps this is a good first step.
> 
> It's a bit annoying that the hardware doesn't provide a EOC bit
> anywhere in the registers.  That would have allowed us to be a bit
> cleverer.

I totally agree. Actually, this chip does not support any 'register
read', the only things we can read are measures (temperature/voltages).


Thanks,
Miquèl