linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: rtc: add bindings for max313xx RTCs

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]

Date:   Fri, 21 Oct 2022 14:29:48 +0200
From:   Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To:     "Tilki, Ibrahim" <Ibrahim.Tilki@...log.com>
Cc:     "a.zummo@...ertech.it" <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        "jdelvare@...e.com" <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org" 
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Arslanbenzer, Zeynep" <Zeynep.Arslanbenzer@...log.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dt-bindings: rtc: add bindings for max313xx RTCs

On 21/10/2022 11:44:12+0000, Tilki, Ibrahim wrote:
> > > +  interrupt-names:
> > > +    description: |
> > > +      Name of the interrupt pin of the RTC used for IRQ. Not required for
> > > +      RTCs that only have single interrupt pin available. Some of the RTCs
> > > +      share interrupt pins with clock input/output pins.
> > > +    minItems: 1
> > > +    items:
> > > +      - enum: [INTA, INTB]
> > > +      - enum: [INTA, INTB]
> > > +
> > 
> > I don't think this is right, what this is doing is essentially pinmuxing
> > interrupts versus clocks. What happens if you want INTB but this goes
> > directly to a PMIC instead of the SoC?
> > It is not something you can express with your current bindings.
> > 
> 
> Why would a user want INTB when it is not connected to SoC?
> User can specify none, either one or both of the interrupt pins.
> I don't see what the problem here is.
> 

the interrupt pin may be connected to a PMIC that is able to start or
wake up the platform. In that case, the user would not have any
interrupt-names and your driver will fail to mux the interrupt on INTB.
Please fix.

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com