linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Check against matching data instead of ACPI companion

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: <CAHp75Vf6J8kD9-_ComWeyGks9t507ETPtfQYYLPZikciAir-0w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Jun 2021 11:16:23 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Henning Schild <henning.schild@...mens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pinctrl: intel: Check against matching data
 instead of ACPI companion

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 10:53 AM Mika Westerberg
<mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 06:28:23PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > In some cases we may get a platform device that has ACPI companion
> > which is different to the pin control described in the ACPI tables.
> > This is primarily happens when device is instantiated by board file.
>
> Can you point which board file in the mainline kernel has this issue? If
> not then I don't think it makes sense to add code like this.

To my knowledge we don't have such enumeration in the upstream (but it
may be done by third parties against any of our controllers enumerated
by UID, like Broxton or Gemini Lake).

That said, I still think that this is the right thing to do
independently, because logic currently is broken (we have tons of the
examples in the kernel where matching data is in use along with
platform supplied variants and there we check for matching data
first). Anyway, the proper use of this patch can be in the part of the
series which actually enables that kind of enumeration in the
upstream.

In any case I suppose Henning can test this for his purposes.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko