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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMRc=MfZ5ss8Gd_TTPV8EYSv04ENp_C26b3=wukO+UTy_boXUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2025 09:56:28 +0200
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>
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 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