linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] IRQ subsystem changes for v6.8

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZZvf6ck/fO3NUXPN@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:43:37 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] IRQ subsystem changes for v6.8


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:

> Linus,
> 
> Please pull the latest irq/core git tree from:
> 
>    git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git irq-core-2024-01-08

>  .../bindings/interrupt-controller/qcom,mpm.yaml    |  52 ++++++----

Forgot to mention that there's a merge conflict with your tree here, 
between this new commit that restructures the MPM device-tree bindings:

  ca596295f4c9 dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: mpm: Pass MSG RAM slice through phandle

... and this recent upstream commit that extended the bindings:

  c0a2755aced9 dt-bindings: interrupt-controller: Allow #power-domain-cells

My resolution was:

        mpm: interrupt-controller {
            compatible = "qcom,mpm";
            qcom,rpm-msg-ram = <&apss_mpm>;
            interrupts = <GIC_SPI 197 IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_RISING>;
            mboxes = <&apcs_glb 1>;
            interrupt-controller;
            #interrupt-cells = <2>;
            interrupt-parent = <&intc>;
            qcom,mpm-pin-count = <96>;
            qcom,mpm-pin-map = <2 275>,
                               <5 296>,
                               <12 422>,
                               <24 79>,
                               <86 183>,
                               <91 260>;
            #power-domain-cells = <0>;
        };

But I didn't/couldn't test it. No complaints from linux-next testing so 
far, FWIW.

Thanks,

	Ingo