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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <046ece8f-4bcd-4f09-85c3-6bf5427d510c@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2025 17:14:25 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, Kurt Borja <kuurtb@...il.com>,
 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 22/11/2025 16:09, David Lechner wrote:
>>> ...
>>>
>>>>>> +  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.
>>
>> Isn't it misconfiguration of trigger as I said before? It should be for
>> example edge, instead of level?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
> 
> No. It it still works like this for edge triggers.

OK, I still have doubts because it feels like we are adding workaround
for controller issues in device bindings. I don't recall how this was
solved (or if it was at all) in other cases, so fine for now for me.


Best regards,
Krzysztof