linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] pwm: pca9685: Switch to atomic API

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: <CAGngYiW8CaYQ+x0C-OevvCvtFeBqdzAYGQzTTa3nxEYUS7RMTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Dec 2020 11:44:39 -0500
From:   Sven Van Asbroeck <thesven73@...il.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@...ruber.com>,
        linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] pwm: pca9685: Switch to atomic API

Hi Thierry,

On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 9:28 AM Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
> Perhaps Clemens and Sven can shed some light into how this driver is
> being used. There clearly seem to be people interested in this driver,
> so why are there no consumers of this upstream. What's keeping people
> from upstreaming device trees that make use of this?
>

Also, there's this section in the driver:

#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
static const struct acpi_device_id pca9685_acpi_ids[] = {
{ "INT3492", 0 },
{ /* sentinel */ },
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, pca9685_acpi_ids);
#endif

Which means there might be arm64 or intel devices out there that define
presence of this chip via an ACPI tree. Which exists only inside bioses
and would not show up in any devicetree.