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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CACPK8Xdvns7PK9t1ZutAbkJqhb5eRcoWCDySQGsfbtLv+XMvqQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 07:33:59 +0000 From: Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au> To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Cédric Le Goater <clg@...d.org>, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, linux-aspeed <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] leds: pca955x: Expose GPIOs for all pins Hello Pavel, On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 06:41, Cédric Le Goater <clg@...d.org> wrote: > > On 9/21/21 06:39, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > > Without these patches the driver limits the number of pins exposed on > > the gpiochip to the number of pins specified as GPIO in the devicetree, > > but doesn't map between the GPIO and pin number spaces. The result is > > that specifying offset or interleaved GPIOs in the devicetree gives > > unexpected behaviour in userspace. > > > > By always exposing all pins as GPIOs the patches resolve the lack of > > mapping between GPIO offsets and pins on the package in the driver by > > ensuring we always have a 1-to-1 mapping. > > > > The issue is primarily addressed by patch 1/2. Patch 2/2 makes it > > possible to not expose any pins as LEDs (and therefore make them all > > accessible as GPIOs). This has a follow-on effect of allowing the driver > > to bind to a device instantiated at runtime without requiring a > > description in the devicetree. > > > > I've tested the series under qemu to inspect the various interactions > > between LEDs vs GPIOs as well as conflicting GPIO requests. > > Please review! > > This is simpler than the 'ngpio' business we had before. > > Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@...d.org> I saw that you recently merged some LED patches. I was wondering if you could consider this series for v5.18. It still applies cleanly, and we've been running it for a while now, so it's very well tested. Cheers, Joel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists