Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 23 Apr 2022 11:30:25 +0100
Message-ID: <874k2kccse.wl-maz@kernel.org>
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>,
        Sven Peter <sven@svenpeter.dev>,
        Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@rosenzweig.io>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@gmail.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Basavaraj Natikar <Basavaraj.Natikar@amd.com>,
        Shyam Sundar S K <Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/10] gpiolib: Handle immutable irq_chip structures
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkda3L_itpqcnPq6xDoJtNHt8NuvE1MZk1bCNR+u2KKUpBA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20220419141846.598305-1-maz@kernel.org>
        <CACRpkda3L_itpqcnPq6xDoJtNHt8NuvE1MZk1bCNR+u2KKUpBA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
 FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/27.1
 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 22 Apr 2022 22:24:22 +0100,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 4:19 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > This is a followup from [2].
> >
> > I recently realised that the gpiolib play ugly tricks on the
> > unsuspecting irq_chip structures by patching the callbacks.
> >
> > Not only this breaks when an irq_chip structure is made const (which
> > really should be the default case), but it also forces this structure
> > to be copied at nauseam for each instance of the GPIO block, which is
> > a waste of memory.
> >
> > My current approach is to add a new irq_chip flag (IRQCHIP_IMMUTABLE)
> > which does what it says on the tin: don't you dare writing to them.
> > Gpiolib is further updated not to install its own callbacks, and it
> > becomes the responsibility of the driver to call into the gpiolib when
> > required. This is similar to what we do for other subsystems such as
> > PCI-MSI.
> >
> > 5 drivers are updated to this new model: M1, QC, Tegra, pl061 and AMD
> > (as I actively use them) keeping a single irq_chip structure, marking
> > it const, and exposing the new flag.
> >
> > Nothing breaks, the volume of change is small, the memory usage goes
> > down and we have fewer callbacks that can be used as attack vectors.
> > What's not to love?
> >
> > Since there wasn't any objection in the previous round of review, I'm
> > going to take this series into -next to see if anything breaks at
> > scale.
> 
> The series:
> Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> 
> Bartosz: if you're happy with this can you apply it to an immutable branch
> from v5.18-rc1 and merge that into the GPIO for-next and then I can also
> pull that into pinctrl?

For what it is worth, I've pushed this branch into irqchip-next.

You can pick it up from:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms.git/log/?h=irq/gpio-immutable

but I can also drop it from the irqchip tree.

Just let me know.

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.