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: <163426062521.936959.3490351816619205076@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Oct 2021 18:17:05 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Fenglin Wu <quic_fenglinw@...cinc.com>,
        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

Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-10-13 20:20:57)
> 
> On 10/14/2021 3:38 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Fenglin Wu (2021-10-13 01:36:54)
> >> 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.
> > The property is now optional in the binding. Please update the binding.
> Right, thanks for pointing it out. I forgot that part.
> I will update the binding. How about only update the interrupt properties as
> optional in this series then I can come up with following patch to convert
> the binding to YAML format?

Sure. The benefit of converting it to YAML is that we can use the
checker to quickly validate the binding vs. having to read the whole
thing to understand that it's correct. Converting an existing binding to
YAML shouldn't be that hard.