linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: dt-bindings: spi-controller: add wakeup-source and 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 13:43:23 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi: dt-bindings: spi-controller: add wakeup-source
 and interrupts

On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 9:22 AM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 07:52:22AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>
> > if:
> >   properties:
> >     interrupt-names:
> >       contains:
> >         const: wakeup
> >   required:
> >     - interrupt-names
> > then:
> >   required:
> >     - wakeup-source
>
> That seems to say that if we have a device that has an interrupt called
> "wakeup" then it must be a wakeup source.  Is that desirable?  Being
> able to wake the system is partly a property of the system as a whole
> (the wakeup signal needs to be wired somewhere where it can wake things)
> and a device might have a signal that could be used to wake the system,
> may even be called "wakeup" by the device but for some reason isn't
> wired suitably in a given system.

Perhaps it is too strict. It would be useful as a "Did you forget
wakeup-source?" message, but we don't have a way to distinguish that.

Rob