linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: core: configure pinmux from pins debug file

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 19 May 2021 03:02:35 -0700
From:   Drew Fustini <drew@...gleboard.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Dario Binacchi <dariobin@...ero.it>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@...ia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: core: configure pinmux from pins debug file

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 05:01:30PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 4:57 PM Dario Binacchi <dariobin@...ero.it> wrote:
> > > Il 17/05/2021 22:02 Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> ha scritto:
> > > On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 7:43 PM Dario Binacchi <dariobin@...ero.it> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> > > Can't you use strncpy_from_user() ?
> >
> > Ok, I'll use strncpy_from_user() in the next version of the patch
> 
> Don't be in a hurry.
> 
> We need to settle down the interface first. We still haven't heard
> from the maintainer (Linus?) about it. Neither we have a clear view if
> we need to revert that patch that dropped pinconf-config (Drew, what
> do you think?).

Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote in e73339037f6b ("pinctrl: remove unused
'pinconf-config' debugfs interface"):
    
    Of course it might be possible to increase MAX_NAME_LEN, and then add
    .pin_config_dbg_parse_modify callbacks to the drivers, but the whole
    idea of such a limited debug option looks inviable. A more flexible
    way to functionally substitute the original approach is to implicitly
    or explicitly use pinctrl_select_state() function whenever needed.

This makes me think it is not a good idea to bring back pinconf-config.
The pinmux-select debugfs file that I add added in commit 6199f6becc86
("pinctrl: pinmux: Add pinmux-select debugfs file") provides a method to
activate a pin function and pin group which I think provides the same
capability as long as the possible pin functions are described in dts.

thanks,
drew