linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/2] pinctrl: core: fix untreated named gpio ranges in pinctrl_pins

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: Mon, 27 May 2024 15:43:55 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Léo DUBOIN <lduboin@...ebox.fr>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/2] pinctrl: core: fix untreated named gpio ranges
 in pinctrl_pins_show()

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 6:26 PM Léo DUBOIN <lduboin@...ebox.fr> wrote:

> This series covers errors I encountered with the pinctrl_pins_show()
> function when dealing with named gpio ranges generated through the
> device tree using 'gpio-ranges-group-names'.
>
> These errors were introduced with the original implementation in
> f1b206cf7c57561ea156798f323b0541a783bd2f.
>
> Léo DUBOIN (2):
>   pinctrl: core: take into account the pins array in pinctrl_pins_show()
>   pinctrl: core: reset gpio_device in loop in pinctrl_pins_show()

Patches applied for kernel v6.11.

It's debugfs so per definition no regression, people get to test it
in linux-next.

Thanks for looking into this!

Yours,
Linus Walleij