linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: adc: Add TI ADS1018/ADS1118

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: <2676d37e-fe3c-4504-8990-fbee0ce8407a@baylibre.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2025 16:40:50 -0600
From: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@...il.com>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Tobias Sperling <tobias.sperling@...ting.com>
Cc: Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
 Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: iio: adc: Add TI ADS1018/ADS1118

On 11/21/25 2:56 PM, Kurt Borja wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
> 
> On Fri Nov 21, 2025 at 2:10 PM -05, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/11/2025 18:16, Kurt Borja wrote:
>>> Add documentation for Texas Instruments ADS1018 and ADS1118
>>> analog-to-digital converters.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kurt Borja <kuurtb@...il.com>
>>
>> You did not test it before sending, so no full review but few nits to
>> save you one round of reviews:
> 
> My bad! I will fix the errors. Thanks!
> 

...

>>> +  interrupts:
>>> +    description: DOUT/DRDY (Data Out/Data Ready) line.
>>> +    maxitems: 1
>>> +
>>> +  drdy-gpios:
>>> +    description:
>>> +      Extra GPIO line connected to DOUT/DRDY (Data Out/Data Ready). This allows
>>> +      distinguishing between latched and real DRDY IRQs.
>>
>> I have feeling that you miss proper handling of IRQs (e.g. active level)
>> on your board.
> 
> Can you elaborate? Should I specify active level here?
> 
>>
The problem is not about the levels. It is rather that the behavior of the
interrupt when disabled/masked is different on different interrupt controllers.

On some controllers, if an event happens while disabled/masked, it "remembers"
that and will trigger the interrupt as soon as it is enabled even if the
condition doesn't exist anymore. Not a great hardware design IMHO, but there
is real hardware that does this.

I think a better wording would be to leave out "latched" and say that
it is needed to be able to distinguish between an interrupt triggered
by the DRDY signal vs. an interrupt triggered by SPI data.