linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rtc: pcf85363: Allow to wake up system without 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 18 Aug 2023 00:25:43 +0200
From:   Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To:     Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl>
Cc:     linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: pcf85363: Allow to wake up system without IRQ

On 17/08/2023 11:02:43+0200, Mike Looijmans wrote:
> > My comment was also for device_init_wakeup(&client->dev, true);. I think
> > the easiest would be to move this block later on and set client->irq to
> > 0 when devm_request_threaded_irq fails.
> > 
> 
> Ah, clear. That also properly handles things when IRQ fails but
> wakeup-source was present. In table form:
> 
> IRQ   wakeup-source   Call "device_init_wakeup" etc.
> N/A   No              No
> N/A   Yes             Yes
> OK    No              Yes
> OK    Yes             Yes

This case is forbidden, you must not have an interrupt property and
wakeup-source at the same time.

> FAIL  No              No
> FAIL  Yes             Yes

This is then also forbidden
> 
> We still have to program the registers before registering the IRQ I think.

Yes, certainly.


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