linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mfd: add 88pm88x driver

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: <CYULY1BYVCYK.1EGSBSVNRSTLQ@gimli.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2024 13:55:42 +0100
From: "Karel Balej" <karelb@...li.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
To: "Lee Jones" <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: "Karel Balej" <balejk@...fyz.cz>, "Dmitry Torokhov"
 <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, "Rob Herring" <robh+dt@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof
 Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, "Conor Dooley"
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
 <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Duje Mihanović <duje.mihanovic@...le.hr>,
 <~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht>, <phone-devel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] mfd: add 88pm88x driver

Lee Jones, 2024-02-02T12:45:50+00:00:
> On Thu, 01 Feb 2024, Karel Balej wrote:
>
> > Lee Jones, 2024-01-31T11:03:11+00:00:
> > > On Sun, 28 Jan 2024, Karel Balej wrote:
> > > > > > +	/* GPIO1: DVC, GPIO0: input */
> > > > > > +	REG_SEQ0(PM88X_REG_GPIO_CTRL1, 0x40),
> > > > >
> > > > > Shouldn't you set these up using Pintrl?
> > > > 
> > > > You mean to add a new MFD cell for the pins and write the respective
> > > > driver? The downstream implementation has no such thing so I'm not sure
> > > > if I would be able to do that from scratch.
> > >
> > > This is not a Pinctrl driver.
> > >
> > > Isn't there a generic API you can use?
> > 
> > I'm sorry, I don't think I understand what you mean.
>
> Perhaps I misunderstand the code.  It looks like this regmap patch hack
> is configuring pins and a bunch of other things.  Would that be a
> correct assessment?

Yes, that sounds correct.

> If so, where do we draw the line here?  Do we accept a 1000 line driver
> which configures a large SoC with a bunch of bespoke register writes?

I understand, I just don't know what you mean by "a generic API". I'm
also not clear on whether what you have in mind is simply adding a
dedicated driver for the pins as a new subdevice of this MFD.

Thanks,
K. B.