linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] regmap-irq: Drop map from handle_mask

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]

Message-ID: <ZBhxbAlvjplGcAie@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2023 16:45:00 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] regmap-irq: Drop map from handle_mask_sync()
 parameters

On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 05:18:53PM -0400, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 02:44:43PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 05:02:00PM -0400, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> > > Changes in v2:
> > >  - Pull out 104-dio-48e refactor to a precursor patch
> > > 
> > > Remove the map parameter from the struct regmap_irq_chip callback
> > > handle_mask_sync() because it can be passed via the irq_drv_data
> > > parameter instead. The gpio-104-dio-48e driver is the only consumer of
> > > this callback and is thus updated accordingly.
> > > 
> > > A couple pending patchsets also utilize handle_mask_sync() [0][1], so
> > > it'll be useful to merge the changes in this series first to avoid
> > > subsequent noise adjusting the dependent drivers.
> > > 
> > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/r/cover.1677515341.git.william.gray@linaro.org/
> > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/cover.1678106722.git.william.gray@linaro.org/
> > 
> > Good idea and intention, but something went wrong with bisectability as pointed
> > out by the build bot. As a last resort you would need to squash these two, but
> > try first another possible patch series split.

> I should have build tested each commit when I rebased rather than just
> the last.

Right, that's what we call a "compile time bisectability".

> I'd rather avoid a squash so that these changes are distinct
> for the sake of a clear git history on the regmap API change;

That's my point! I glad we are on the same page.

> I'll submit a v3 soon with the minor changes needed.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko