linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: rockchip: mark the GPIO controller as sleeping

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: <3204984.tdWV9SEqCh@diego>
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2026 14:23:20 +0100
From: Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...nel.org>
Cc: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@....qualcomm.com>,
 Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
 Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: rockchip: mark the GPIO controller as sleeping

Am Samstag, 24. Januar 2026, 22:07:12 Mitteleuropäische Normalzeit schrieb Bartosz Golaszewski:
> On Sat, 24 Jan 2026 00:45:25 +0100, Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> said:
> > On 2026-01-23 9:52 pm, Heiko Stübner wrote:

[ snip to get to the core question at the bottom ]

> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> > index e44ef262beec..2fc67aeafdb3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-rockchip.c
> > @@ -3545,10 +3545,9 @@ static int rockchip_pmx_set(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned selector,
> >   	return 0;
> >   }
> >
> > -static int rockchip_pmx_gpio_set_direction(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
> > -					   struct pinctrl_gpio_range *range,
> > -					   unsigned offset,
> > -					   bool input)
> > +static int rockchip_pmx_gpio_request_enable(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
> > +					    struct pinctrl_gpio_range *range,
> > +					    unsigned int offset)
> >   {
> >   	struct rockchip_pinctrl *info = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
> >   	struct rockchip_pin_bank *bank;
> > @@ -3562,7 +3561,7 @@ static const struct pinmux_ops rockchip_pmx_ops = {
> >   	.get_function_name	= rockchip_pmx_get_func_name,
> >   	.get_function_groups	= rockchip_pmx_get_groups,
> >   	.set_mux		= rockchip_pmx_set,
> > -	.gpio_set_direction	= rockchip_pmx_gpio_set_direction,
> > +	.gpio_request_enable	= rockchip_pmx_gpio_request_enable,
> >   };
> >
> >   /*
> >
> 
> I'm not sure what's going on here. You don't really need to call
> pinctrl_gpio_direction_input/output()?

No we actually don't.

The current _set_direction function:

static int rockchip_pmx_gpio_set_direction(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
					   struct pinctrl_gpio_range *range,
					   unsigned offset,
					   bool input)
{
	struct rockchip_pinctrl *info = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
	struct rockchip_pin_bank *bank;

	bank = pin_to_bank(info, offset);
	return rockchip_set_mux(bank, offset - bank->pin_base, RK_FUNC_GPIO);
}

really only ever touches the pinmux and has nothing to do with setting
the direction, which is solely the task of the gpio-controller/-driver.

So moving that to the request callback would likely solve all our current
problems?

Heiko