linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/15] gpio: bd71828: use new line value setter callbacks

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: <CAMRc=MfofTMnfCYenUTstWUeGN5RYzJTrg2nGSzCe8tdBMksmw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 14:22:29 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
Cc: Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>, 
	Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, 
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, 
	Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>, Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>, 
	Michael Buesch <m@...s.ch>, Thomas Richard <thomas.richard@...tlin.com>, 
	Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@...opsys.com>, Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, 
	Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, 
	Support Opensource <support.opensource@...semi.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, 
	chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, 
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] gpio: bd71828: use new line value setter callbacks

On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 2:20 PM Matti Vaittinen
<mazziesaccount@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > @@ -28,12 +27,10 @@ static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> >        * we are dealing with - then we are done
> >        */
> >       if (offset == HALL_GPIO_OFFSET)
> > -             return;
> > +             return 0;
>
> Should this be -EINVAL (or, can this check be just dropped?) Value of an
> input pin is tried to be set.
>

I don't want to break existing users but I did notice that and figured
that we should rather check this in core GPIO code not each individual
driver.

I put that on my TODO list.

Bart