linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH v1 8/9] spmi: pmic-arb: make interrupt support optional

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: <3bf1fbf3-e741-ef08-a4e4-b348b877d02a@quicinc.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Oct 2021 16:36:54 +0800
From:   Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@...cinc.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     <collinsd@...eaurora.org>, <subbaram@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v1 8/9] spmi: pmic-arb: make interrupt support
 optional


On 10/13/2021 1:41 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-09-16 23:33:03)
>> From: David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>
>>
>> Make the support of PMIC peripheral interrupts optional for
>> spmi-pmic-arb devices.  This is useful in situations where
>> SPMI address mapping is required without the need for IRQ
>> support.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@...cinc.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> Is there a binding update? Can the binding be converted to YAML as well?
This change doesn't add/update any dtsi properties but just checking if an
existing property is present to decide if IRQ support is required, so no
binding change is needed.
>
>>   1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
>> index 988204c..55fa981 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
>> +++ b/drivers/spmi/spmi-pmic-arb.c
>> @@ -1280,10 +1280,12 @@ static int spmi_pmic_arb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>                  goto err_put_ctrl;
>>          }
>>   
>> -       pmic_arb->irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "periph_irq");
>> -       if (pmic_arb->irq < 0) {
>> -               err = pmic_arb->irq;
>> -               goto err_put_ctrl;
>> +       if (of_find_property(pdev->dev.of_node, "interrupt-names", NULL)) {
> I don't think we should be keying off of interrupt-names. Instead we
> should be checking for something else. Maybe interrupt-controller
> property?
Sure, I can update it to check the presence of "interrupt-controller" 
property.
>> +               pmic_arb->irq = platform_get_irq_byname(pdev, "periph_irq");
>> +               if (pmic_arb->irq < 0) {
>> +                       err = pmic_arb->irq;
>> +                       goto err_put_ctrl;