linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] gpiolib: acpi: Add a helper for programming debounce

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: <d7199941-9f7d-4dcc-89b2-9f54ec2a0232@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2025 11:04:11 -0500
From: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hansg@...nel.org>, Mika Westerberg <westeri@...nel.org>,
 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Bartosz Golaszewski
 <brgl@...ev.pl>, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
 "open list:GPIO ACPI SUPPORT" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
 "open list:GPIO ACPI SUPPORT" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "open list:INPUT (KEYBOARD, MOUSE, JOYSTICK, TOUCHSCREEN)..."
 <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>, Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] gpiolib: acpi: Add a helper for programming
 debounce

On 6/26/2025 9:29 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2025 at 04:58:10PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>>
>> Debounce is programmed in two places and considered non-fatal in one of
>> them. Introduce a helper for programming debounce and show a warning
>> when failing to program.
> 
>> This is a difference in behavior for the call
>> in acpi_dev_gpio_irq_wake_get_by().
> 
> When I meant "both", I was thinking of the _single_ existing case and new one
> which you are about to add. In principle, I think changing behaviour here is
> undesired. We provoke BIOS writers to make mistakes with debounce settings in
> GpioInt() resources.
> 
> I agree on the patch...
> 
>> -			/* ACPI uses hundredths of milliseconds units */
>> -			ret = gpio_set_debounce_timeout(desc, info.debounce * 10);
>> -			if (ret)
>> -				return ret;
>> +			acpi_set_debounce_timeout(desc, info.debounce);
> 
> ...except this hunk.
> 

OK in that case I'll just squash patches 1 and 2 together, pick up Hans' 
tag and drop this hunk.