linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] net: dsa: mt7530: Use GPIO polarity to generate correct reset sequence

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: <20251204153721.ubmxifrev4cre6ab@skbuf>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 17:37:21 +0200
From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>, Frank Wunderlich <frankwu@....de>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
	Chen Minqiang <ptpt52@...il.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	"Chester A. Unal" <chester.a.unal@...nc9.com>,
	DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
	Sean Wang <sean.wang@...iatek.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] net: dsa: mt7530: Use GPIO polarity to generate
 correct reset sequence

On Thu, Dec 04, 2025 at 04:22:10PM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > If this is blocking progress for new device trees, can we just construct,
> > using of_machine_is_compatible(), a list of all boards where the device
> > tree defines incorrect reset polarity that shouldn't be trusted by the
> > driver when driving the reset GPIO? If we do this, we can also leave
> > those existing device trees alone.
> 
> I've still not seen a good answer to my question, why not just leave
> it 'broken', and document the fact.
> 
> Does the fact it is inverted in both DT and the driver prevent us from
> making some board work?
> 
> Why do we need to fix this?
> 
> Sometimes it is better to just leave it alone, if it is not hurting
> anybody.
> 
> 	Andrew

Frank said that the fact the driver expecting a wrong device tree is
forcing him to keep introducing even more wrong device trees for new
boards.