linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Enable UHS-1 support for Keem Bay SOC

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]

Date:   Wed, 2 Dec 2020 13:41:12 +0100
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:     "Shevchenko, Andriy" <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     "Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini" <muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@...el.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Raja Subramanian, Lakshmi Bai" 
        <lakshmi.bai.raja.subramanian@...el.com>,
        Wan Ahmad Zainie <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@...el.com>,
        mgross@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/4] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Enable UHS-1 support for
 Keem Bay SOC

On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 13:24, Shevchenko, Andriy
<andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 11:53:42AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Dec 2020 at 08:02, <muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@...el.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > Kindly help to review this patch set.
> >
> > This version looks a lot better to me, but I am still requesting you
> > to model the pinctrl correctly. I don't see a reason not to, but I may
> > have overlooked some things.
>
> I'm wondering why we need to mock up a pin control from something which has no
> pin control interface. It's rather communication with firmware that does pin
> control under the hood, but it also may be different hardware in the other /
> future generations. Would you accept mocking up the same calls over the kernel
> as pin control, as something else?

Well, my point is that modeling this a pinctrl would keep the mmc
driver portable. Additionally, it's very common to manage pinctrls in
mmc drivers, so it's not like this is an entirely new thing that I
propose.

If/when it turns out that there is a new HW having a different pinctrl
interface, it would just mean that we need a new pinctrl driver, but
can leave the mmc driver as is.

>
> > Would you mind to re-submit to include the gpio/pinctlr list and the
> > maintainers, to get their opinion.
>
> And I will send immediately the same comment which I believe Linus W. supports.
> But who knows...
>
> Cc'ed to Linus as I mentioned him.

Thanks, let's see what Linus thinks then.

Kind regards
Uffe