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]

Message-Id: <ce1d8150-c595-44d5-b19a-040920481709@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:50:25 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 "Bartosz Golaszewski" <brgl@...ev.pl>
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 10:27, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 10:17 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
>
>> On second thought
>> though: are you sure drivers/gpio/ is the right place for it?
>
> Actually that is something I requested.
>
> I think it fits in drivers/gpio as it is such a clear cut usage of GPIO
> lines, and it doesn't really fit into any other subsystem.
>
>> May I suggest moving it over to drivers/misc/?
>
> Misc is a bit...
> messy. I remember Arnd being very sceptical about putting stuff there
> rather than creating new subsystems, so since I've tried to avoid it,
> albeit recently more and more stuff gets merged there again :/

Right, and that is mostly to avoid having code in there because
there is no other place for it. Some parts of drivers/misc should
have been a separate subsystem, some should have use an existing
subsystem, and other parts should have never been merged.

The parts of drivers/misc that make the most sense to me are
those that expose a one-of-a-kind piece of hardware as a
single character device.

This one would probably fit into drivers/misc/ better than
some other drivers we have in there, but leaving it in
drivers/gpio/ also seems fine.

I could also imagine the functionality being exposed
through drivers/iio/ in a way that is similar to an
adc, but I don't know if that would work in practice or
how much of a rewrite that would be.

      Arnd