linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] platform-driver-x86: ACPI EC Extra driver for Oaktrail

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]

Date:	Thu, 6 Jan 2011 18:11:06 +0800
From:	Yin Kangkai <kangkai.yin@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@...il.com>
Cc:	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Wang, Yong Y" <yong.y.wang@...el.com>,
	"Liu, Bing Wei" <bing.wei.liu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform-driver-x86: ACPI EC Extra driver for Oaktrail

On 2011-01-06, 08:29 +0100, Corentin Chary wrote:
> Hi,

Thanks for the review and comments.

> > @@ -0,0 +1,349 @@
> > +/*-*-linux-c-*-*/
> 
> I don't know what's our general policy about that, but I don't think
> each text editor should be allowed to add its own header on each
> files. Most of the time you can configure your editor to set the
> right indent style based on the path of the file or something like that.

Yes, I agree with you, will remove that.

> > + * gps - GPS subsystem enabled: contains either 0 or 1. (rw)
> > + * wifi - WiFi subsystem enabled: contains either 0 or 1. (rw)
> > + * wwan - WWAN (3G) subsystem enabled: contains either 0 or 1. (rw)
> 
> Is there a reason do add these files in /sys/devices/platform while the
> functionality is already provided by rfkill ?

Provide a alternative way to enable/disable these devices, and also
for debugging. Does that make any sense?

> > + * camera - Camera subsystem enabled: contains either 0 or 1. (rw)
> > + * bluetooth - Bluetooth subsystem enabled: contains either 0 or 1. (rw)
> > + * touchscreen - Touchscreen subsystem enabled: contains either 0 or 1. (ro)
> 
> This should be in Documentation/ABI/testing/

Should I prepare the document now and submit also?

> > +
> > +static struct platform_device *oaktrail_device;
> > +static struct rfkill *bt_rfkill;
> > +static struct rfkill *gps_rfkill;
> > +static struct rfkill *wifi_rfkill;
> > +static struct rfkill *wwan_rfkill;
> 
> Here you could create two (four ?) helpers that contains the logic,
> and craft dummy functions which only call the helpers with the right
> parameters in your macros.
> 
> These helpers could also be used by later functions.
> 

I will try to define some micros..

> > +static int setup_rfkill(void)
> 
> oaktrail_rfkill_init() ?

Sure.

> > +       rfkill_destroy(wwan_rfkill);
> > +err_allocate_wwan:
> > +       rfkill_unregister(gps_rfkill);
> > +err_register_gps:
> > +       rfkill_destroy(gps_rfkill);
> > +err_allocate_gps:
> > +       rfkill_unregister(bt_rfkill);
> > +err_register_bt:
> > +       rfkill_destroy(bt_rfkill);
> > +err_allocate_bt:
> > +       rfkill_unregister(wifi_rfkill);
> > +err_register_wifi:
> > +       rfkill_destroy(wifi_rfkill);
> > +
> > +       return ret;
> > +}
> 
> Here  I'd write an helper function to call rfkill_alloc,
> rfkill_register and handle
> rfkill_register failure. And then, if any of the helper calls fail, just call
> oaktrail_rfkill_exit (which which rfkill if the rfkill pointer is NULL or not).
> 
> oaktrail_rfkill_exit could also be used in the module exit function.

Yes, will try to do that.

> > +static int __devinit oaktrail_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +       int err;
> > +
> > +       err = sysfs_create_group(&pdev->dev.kobj, &oaktrail_attribute_group);
> > +       return err;
> > +}
> 
> return sysfs_create_group(&pdev->dev.kobj, &oaktrail_attribute_group);
> 
> we don't really need err right now, do we ?

Will change this.

> > +MODULE_AUTHOR("Yin Kangkai (kangkai.yin@...el.com)");
> > +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Intel Oaktrail Platform ACPI Extras");
> > +MODULE_VERSION(DRIVER_VERSION);
> > +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> 
> Maybe you could add some MODULE_ALIAS("dmi:xxxxx") lines
> to enable module autoloading ?

Will try to.

Thanks for the review.

Regards,
Kangkai
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/