linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] gpiolib: remove gpio_set

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 07 Feb 2023 15:34:10 +0100
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        "Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
        "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] gpiolib: remove gpio_set_debounce

On Tue, Feb 7, 2023, at 12:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 11:07:35AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 08:32:06PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jan 31, 2023 at 09:44:31PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 11:11:46AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> > > > -	return !gpio_get_value(ts->gpio_pendown);
>> > > > +	return !gpiod_get_value(ts->gpio_pendown);
>> > > 
>> > > No, we can not blindly do that without checking annotations on GPIOs.
>> > 
>> > But this is easy to fix, i.e. use raw API, no?
>> 
>> I'd rather not (I hope I can make this driver respect declared polarity
>> at some point), so for debounce we could do:
>> 
>> 	gpiod_set_debounce(gpio_to_gpiod(), ...);
>> 
>> in ads7846 for now, and get rid of gpio_set_debounce() as a publc API.
>
> This will work and we can keep it for a while (gpio_to_desc(), I believe you
> meant this one, is part of the new API to keep this bridge for the cases like
> this).
>
> Arnd, are you going to send a v3? It would be really nice to have less
> collisions next cycle if your series is applied.

I was planning to, but I see you beat me to it already, sorry for
dropping the ball here and thanks for picking it up!

      Arnd