linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpiolib: add gpiod_to_gpio

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: <CACRpkdaus1oRCiafiJjqTkARcKBuxvNfeqDrve7ZdG4UqnNX5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 10:00:05 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, 
	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpiolib: add gpiod_to_gpio_device() stub for !GPIOLIB

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 9:59 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski
<krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org> wrote:

> [Bart]
> > Why is this needed? Users of gpio/driver.h should select GPIOLIB.
>
> The third patch shows you the user which will not select GPIOLIB. Why?
> Because there is no hard dependency between one core framework (RESET)
> on other core framework (GPIOLIB).
>
> The first two patches are added for the same purpose, even though there
> is no need currently.

That reset driver implementing a GPIO chip has not been reviewed by the
GPIO maintainers so I looked up the patch and replied, we have
review comments.

Yours,
Linus Walleij