linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iio: tmp006: Set correct iio name

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:	Mon, 25 Apr 2016 23:59:54 +0300
From:	Crestez Dan Leonard <cdleonard@...il.com>
To:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Yong Li <sdliyong@...il.com>
Cc:	knaack.h@....de, lars@...afoo.de, pmeerw@...erw.net,
	k.kozlowski@...sung.com, mranostay@...il.com,
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: tmp006: Set correct iio name

On 04/25/2016 10:33 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On 22/04/16 04:43, Yong Li wrote:
>> When load the driver using the below command:
>> echo tmp006 0x40 > /sys/bus/i2c/devices/i2c-0/new_device
>>
>> In sysfs, the i2c name is tmp006, however the iio name is 0-0040,
>> they are inconsistent. With this patch,
>> the iio name will be the same as the i2c device name
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yong Li <sdliyong@...il.com>
> Peter, this looks right to me, but could you take a quick look as I guess
> there might be a reason you did this in an unusual way originally?
>
Is there a "correct" or "usual" way to set indio_dev->name? Some quick 
grepping shows no clear standard:

$ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | wc -l
148
$ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep id | wc -l
52
$ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep dev_name | wc -l
20
$ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep -i drv | wc -l
19
$ git grep -h 'indio_dev->name =' drivers/iio/ | grep -i driver | wc -l
15

It seems that many devices use dev_name(&i2c_client->dev) or otherwise 
some sort of "ABC123_DRIVER_NAME" constant.

It's also not clear what this "name" field is for. Is it more than just 
a cosmetic sysfs attribute? It seems to me that names don't have to be 
unique so it would be wrong to use them for identification.

-- 
Regards,
Leonard