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  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]
Date:	Tue, 21 Jan 2014 19:50:06 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <>
To:	Alexandre Courbot <>
Cc:	"" 
	Linus Walleij <>,
	"" <>,
	Heikki Krogerus <>,
	netdev <>,
	"linux-wireless" <>,
	"linux-sunxi" <>,
	"linux-kernel" <>,
	Maxime Ripard <>,
	"Chen-Yu Tsai" <>,
	Johannes Berg <>,
	Mika Westerberg <>,
	"David S. Miller" <>,
	"" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 4/6] net: rfkill: gpio: add device tree support

On Tuesday 21 January 2014, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> >> As discussed earlier in this thread I'm not sure the con_id is
> >> suitable for labelling GPIOs. It'd be better to have a proper name
> >> specified in DT/ACPI instead.
> >
> > +1
> I wonder why you guys prefer to have the name defined in the GPIO
> mapping. Having the driver decide the label makes it easier to look up
> which GPIO does what in debugfs, whereas nothing prevents people to
> name GPIOs whatever inadequate name they want in the device DT node.
> What am I overlooking here?

I should have another look at the debugfs representation, but isn't
there a global namespace that gets used for all gpios?  Neither the
con_id nor the name that the driver picks would be globally unique
and stable across kernel versions, so they don't make a good user

I think what we want here is a system-wide unique identifier for
each gpio line that may get represented in debugfs, and use a new
DT mechanism to communicate that.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists