linux-kernel - Re: [RFD] Functional dependencies between devices

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:	Tue, 24 Nov 2015 14:56:45 +0100
From:	Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>,
	Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...gle.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [RFD] Functional dependencies between devices

On 11/21/2015 03:04 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 07:50:45AM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>> On 11/17/2015 02:55 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> This is going to be really common but I'm not sure I see a problem with
>>> it in terms of what Raphael is proposing - could you go into more detail
>>> on the problem you see here?
>> If clock provider is not a device driver and it depends on clocks of
>> another clock
>> provider you cannot 'translate' this dependency as dependency between
>> devices,
> What makes you say that this is the case?  There should be nothing
> stopping us having dependencies between two devices of the same type.

To be clear I described situation that one clock provider uses clock
of another clock provider and consumer is not modeled as device.


>
>> so this RFD does not cover them.
>> Additionally if you look into kernel there are many calls in form
>> 'clk_get(NULL, name)',
>> it suggests that not only clock providers are consumers without
>> underlying device driver.
> Like I said in my earlier reply:
>
> | > - many clock providers, irq domains are not provided by devices,
>
> | That seems like something we can and possibly should change if we want.
>
> This applies just as much to consumers as to providers.

OK, then it is just something to do :)

Regards
Andrzej

--
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/