linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 1/1] gpio: add sloppy logic analyzer using polling

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]

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 16:20:34 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@...ev.pl>,
 "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: "Wolfram Sang" <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
 Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
 "Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@....net>, "Kent Gibson" <warthog618@...il.com>,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/1] gpio: add sloppy logic analyzer using polling

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, at 15:51, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 3:47 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 11:43 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
>>
>> > To prove this point, I even moved the gpio-virtuser driver I'm working
>> > on to drivers/misc/ too as it isn't a GPIO provider either and merely
>> > a GPIO consumer with a one-shot user-space interface not conforming to
>> > any standards.
>>
>> We *could* just create drivers/gpio/consumers/* and an entry into the
>> top-level drivers/Kconfig to have those appear right under the GPIO
>> providers...
>>
>> Yours,
>> Linus Walleij
>
> That would just add to confusion. GPIO consumers are all over the tree
> after all.
>
> Whatever, let's keep it in drivers/gpio/. Greg KH just shot down my
> idea of putting gpio-virtuser in drivers/misc/.

I could imagine treating both gpio-virtuser and this code as
a gpiolib extension rather than a consumer (which is usually
part of some other subsystem's driver).

It would also make sense to me to separate gpio providers
from gpiolib in a way, moving one or both of them into a
subdirectory of drivers/gpio/.

It's probably not worth the pain of moving files, but at
least in Kconfig and filenames, they could be named
gpiolib-virtuser.c and gpiolib-sloppy-logic-analyzer.c
to make it clear that these are not gpio provider drivers
but something else, more along the lines of gpiolib-cdev.c
and gpiolib-sysfs.c.

     Arnd