linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] serial: 8250_pci: use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE

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:	Sun, 01 Dec 2013 19:45:50 -0800
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>, 'Joe Perches' <joe@...ches.com>,
	'Greg Kroah-Hartman' <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	'Bjorn Helgaas' <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	'Andrew Morton' <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	'Andy Whitcroft' <apw@...onical.com>,
	linux-serial@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] serial: 8250_pci: use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro

On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote:
>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
>>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't
>>>>>>> use it in more places.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm
>>>>>>> not going to take these patches.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (+cc Joe Perches, Andrew Morton, Andy Whitcroft)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Joe Perches,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would you fix checkpatch.pl about DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
>>>>>> Currently, checkpatch.pl guides to use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
>>>>>> as below.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id
>>>>>>    #331: FILE: drivers/usb/host/ehci-pci.c:331:
>>>>>>    +static const struct pci_device_id pci_ids [] = { {
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, Greg Kroah-Hartman mentioned that DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
>>>>>> shouldn't be used anymore.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, would you change checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
>>>>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For example,
>>>>>>    WARNING: Use struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
>>>>>
>>>>> The documentation doesn't agree with Greg.
>>> []
>>>> I say just remove it, I should have done that years ago when I was the
>>>> PCI maintainer, just never got around to it.  No other bus has something
>>>> like this for their device ids, why should PCI be "special"?
>>>
>>> Anyone else have an opinion?
>>>
>>> I don't care one way or another, but please, one way
>>> not two.
>>

Same here.

>> (+cc Bjorn Helgaas, linux-pci)
>>
>> Then, how about the following steps?
>>
>> 1. Fix ./Documentation/PCI/pci.txt as below.
>>     (Jingoo Han)
>>     The ID table is an array of struct pci_device_id entries ending with an
>>     -all-zero entry; use of the macro DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE is the preferred
>>     -method of declaring the table.  Each entry consists of:
>>     +all-zero entry; Each entry consists of:
>>
>> 2. Fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
>>      struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE.
>>      (Joe Perches)
>
> If all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs are replaced with 'const struct pci_device_id'
> and these patches are merged through 'driver-core.git', it will be not
> necessary to fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl.
>
Why not ?

Guenter

--
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/