linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] input: ps2-gpio: enforce and document open drain

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: <9d033b4d-544e-ed14-fd5a-10370850c54f@canonical.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Feb 2022 08:05:59 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To:     Danilo Krummrich <danilokrummrich@...develop.de>
Cc:     dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] input: ps2-gpio: enforce and document open drain

On 14/02/2022 23:42, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:50:21PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 12/02/2022 00:31, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>> The PS/2 bus defines the data and clock line be open drain, therefore
>>> document this in the dt-binding and enforce the particular flag in the
>>> driver.
>>>
>>> Without enforcing to flag at least the clock gpio as open drain we run
>>> into the following warning:
>>>
>>> WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 40 at drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c:3175 gpiochip_enable_irq+0x54/0x90
>>>
>>> gpiochip_enable_irq() warns on a GPIO being configured as output and
>>> using IRQ without being flagged as open drain.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Danilo Krummrich <danilokrummrich@...develop.de>
>>> ---
>>>  .../devicetree/bindings/serio/ps2-gpio.yaml        | 14 ++++++++++----
>>>  drivers/input/serio/ps2-gpio.c                     |  9 +++++++--
>>>  2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
>> Bindings as separate patch, please.
> Are you fine with adding this additional documentation directly to the patch
> converting the binding to a json-schema or do you prefer it to be a separate
> patch?

I propose a separate patch, so you will have two bindings patches.

Best regards,
Krzysztof