linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 07/15] gpio: brcmstb: use new generic GPIO chip API

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: <cfe7bc19-763f-4e92-b1ae-355c661bcc19@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 12:50:47 -0700
From: Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Keguang Zhang <keguang.zhang@...il.com>, Alban Bedel <albeu@...e.fr>,
 Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
 Broadcom internal kernel review list
 <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
 Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
 AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
 Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
 Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>, Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>,
 Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, spacemit@...ts.linux.dev,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/15] gpio: brcmstb: use new generic GPIO chip API

On 9/11/2025 12:56 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2025 at 2:11 AM Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> @@ -700,7 +707,8 @@ static int brcmstb_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>                 * be retained from S5 cold boot
>>>                 */
>>>                need_wakeup_event |= !!__brcmstb_gpio_get_active_irqs(bank);
>>> -             gc->write_reg(reg_base + GIO_MASK(bank->id), 0);
>>> +             gpio_generic_write_reg(&bank->chip,
>>> +                                    reg_base + GIO_MASK(bank->id), 0);
>>>
>>>                err = gpiochip_add_data(gc, bank);
>>>                if (err) {
>>>
>> I suppose I'm OK with all of this, but I'm just curious about the longer
>> term plans for the member accesses. Is there an intent to have helpers
>> for things like?:
>> chip.gc.offset
>> chip.gc.ngpio
> 
> I don't think so. It would require an enormous effort and these fields
> in struct gpio_chip are pretty stable so there's no real reason for
> it.
> 
> Bart
Ok, so assuming struct gpio_chip is sticking around long term that makes 
sense to me.

Thanks!

Acked-by: Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>