linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] docs: firmware-guide: ACPI: Add named interrupt doc

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]

Message-ID: <CAHp75Vcs3raid6rHk0AJOomgSKJ1T-cF_qbcq_Yksitz_sE=3A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jan 2022 16:00:56 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Akhil R <akhilrajeev@...dia.com>
Cc:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Christian Koenig <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] docs: firmware-guide: ACPI: Add named interrupt doc

On Fri, Jan 21, 2022 at 2:50 PM Akhil R <akhilrajeev@...dia.com> wrote:
>
> > > Added details and example for named interrupts in the ACPI table.
> >
> > Added details and example for --> Add a detailed example of the
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > +            Interrupt (ResourceConsumer, Level, ActiveHigh, Exclusive) {
> > > +                0x20,
> >
> > I would think of splitting this to two separate entries in between of which the
> > GpioInt() resource is provided. It will explicitly show that you describe the case
> > only for Interrupt(). Something like
> >
> >   Interrupt (...) { 0x20 }
> >   GpioInt(...) { ... }
> >   Interrupt (...) { 0x24 }
> >
> > But it's up to you.
> Instead, would it be good to add a statement mentioning this explicitly. Something
> like -
>
>     The interrupt name 'default' will correspond to 0x20 in Interrupt()
>     resource and 'alert' to 0x24. Note that only the Interrupt() resource
>     is mapped and not GpioInt() or similar.
>
> I feel mixing these in the example would add a bit of confusion to the reader.

That's why I added "up to you" in my previous reply. I also thought
about the example being a bit confusing for a reader who is
non-familiar with the ACPI.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko