linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/16] gpio: aspeed: Convert to immutable irq

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:   Wed, 8 Mar 2023 13:13:25 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>
Cc:     Mun Yew Tham <mun.yew.tham@...el.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>, Alban Bedel <albeu@...e.fr>,
        Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
        Jay Fang <f.fangjian@...wei.com>,
        Daniel Palmer <daniel@...ngy.jp>,
        Romain Perier <romain.perier@...il.com>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/16] gpio: aspeed: Convert to immutable irq_chip

On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 2:22 AM Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2023 at 13:04, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:

> > +static void aspeed_gpio_irq_print_chip(struct irq_data *d, struct seq_file *p)
> > +{
> > +       const struct aspeed_gpio_bank *bank;
> > +       struct aspeed_gpio *gpio;
> > +       u32 bit;
> > +       int rc, offset;
> > +
> > +       rc = irqd_to_aspeed_gpio_data(d, &gpio, &bank, &bit, &offset);
>
> Why do we call this instead of using irq_data_get_irq_chip_data?

Because this is what the other irqchip callbacks do and I do not
dare to do anything inventive or different as I can't really test
the patches.

> Actually, the callback appears to do the same as the default
> implementation, so we could just drop it?

So is chip->name always set to dev_name(dev) if we don't define
it? I had no idea.

I can respon with this change, the optional IRQ should be a separate
patch I think?

Yours,
Linus Walleij