linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/25] irqdomain: Add firmware info reporting interface

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]

Message-ID: <877by5rnu7.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 17:49:36 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Will
 Deacon <will@...nel.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Rob
 Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, Greg
 Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Sven Peter <sven@...nel.org>,
 Janne Grunau <j@...nau.net>, Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
 James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/25] irqdomain: Add firmware info reporting interface

On Thu, Sep 11 2025 at 15:13, Marc Zyngier wrote:

> On Tue, 09 Sep 2025 10:18:01 +0100,
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>> 
>> On Mon, Sep 08 2025 at 17:31, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> > @@ -69,6 +90,8 @@ void of_phandle_args_to_fwspec(struct device_node *np, const u32 *args,
>> >   * @translate:	Given @fwspec, decode the hardware irq number (@out_hwirq) and
>> >   *		linux irq type value (@out_type). This is a generalised @xlate
>> >   *		(over struct irq_fwspec) and is preferred if provided.
>> > + * @get_info: Given @info, report additional firmware-provided information.
>> > + *            Optional.
>> 
>> get_info() is pretty generic. Can we have some more descriptive name for
>> that? Also please keep the tabular formatting of the doc intact.
>
> Would get_fwspec_info() be descriptive enough?

I think so