linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] 8250: Split Fintek PCIE to UART to independent file

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:	Fri, 29 Jan 2016 23:08:08 +0530
From:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:	Peter Hung <hpeter@...il.com>, Rob Groner <rgroner@....com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
	"Krogerus, Heikki" <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
	Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
	soeren.grunewald@...y.de, Wang YanQing <udknight@...il.com>,
	adam.lee@...onical.com, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
	Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>,
	scottwood@...escale.com, Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	Joachim Eastwood <manabian@...il.com>,
	Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter H <peter_hong@...tek.com.tw>,
	Peter Hung <hpeter+linux_kernel@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] 8250: Split Fintek PCIE to UART to independent file

On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 03:44:16PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 12:53 PM, Sudip Mukherjee
> <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 04:24:36PM +0800, Peter Hung wrote:
> >> Hi Sudip,
> >>
> >> Sudip Mukherjee 於 2016/1/20 下午 02:22 寫道:
> >> >On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 10:59:28AM +0800, Peter Hung wrote:
> >>
> >> >But my personal opinion, if we move out the serial port related code
> >> >into a new driver (a new Kconfig symbol) userspace of many system will
> >> >break if this new symbol is not enabled by the distributions. But in the
> >> >way I have done the new symbol needs to be enabled only if the user
> >> >wants to use the GPIO capability. If that is not enabled GPIO cannot be
> >> >used but it will never break the serial port related code for them.
> >> >I think we should give a thought to that before splitting out the codes
> >> >from 8250_pci.
> >>
> >> I agree with your opinion. I'm trying to implement GPIO with 2 ways,
> >> One is like yours, add platform_device with in 8250_pci.c and implement
> >> GPIOLIB platform driver with in 'driver/gpio", and the other is trying
> >> split out from 8250_pci.c to MFD.
> >>
> >> In my personal opinion, the first method is less impact with compatible
> >> old system.
> >
> > Looks like no one else is in support of our opinion. Fair enough, I will
> > split out the related code from 8250_pci and create the MFD driver this
> > weekend for my hardware.
> 
> Yeah, MFD looks preferable.
> 
> Btw, don't forget to backlist your devices in 8250_pci since they
> quite possible provide a PCI class which is used by 8250_pci driver
> for default enumeration.

One doubt. If I have understood correctly the main reason you have asked
me to split the code out of 8250_pci so that the size reduces. But
pci_xr17v35x_setup() is also used by another card which has
PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMMTECH. So even if I create a separate file for exar cards,
almost identical function will still remain in 8250_pci.

regards
sudip