linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/19] dt-bindings: iio: resolver: add devicetree bindings for ad2s1210

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]

Message-ID: <CAMknhBFRe-M9VxHSBA9A7Royneg4zshrf42_2HtYZWRKQ4CCYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Sep 2023 10:54:15 -0500
From:   David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
        Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
        Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>,
        Philip Molloy <pmolloy@...libre.com>,
        Apelete Seketeli <aseketeli@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/19] dt-bindings: iio: resolver: add devicetree
 bindings for ad2s1210

On Sun, Sep 24, 2023 at 11:57 AM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 09:43:42 -0500
> David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com> wrote:
>
...
> > +  fault-gpios:
> > +    description:
> > +      GPIO lines connected to the LOT and DOS pins. These pins combined indicate
> > +      the type of fault present, if any. As these pins a pulled low to indicate
> > +      a fault condition, they should be configured as GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW.
>
> What if someone is being odd and connected only 1 of them?
> It's annoying how often people run out of pins and do things like this.
>
> > +    minItems: 2
> > +    maxItems: 2
> > +
In this case the two lines are not independent. If both lines are
asserted, it does
not mean that both LOT and DOS faults exists but rather it means that a LOS
fault exists. So it would seem problematic to allow one without the other here.