linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] of: base: add support to get machine model 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:   Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:08:30 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] of: base: add support to get machine model name



On 17/11/16 13:50, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday, November 17, 2016 11:50:50 AM CET Sudeep Holla wrote:
>> Currently platforms/drivers needing to get the machine model name are
>> replicating the same snippet of code. In some case, the OF reference
>> counting is either missing or incorrect.
>>
>> This patch adds support to read the machine model name either using
>> the "model" or the "compatible" property in the device tree root node.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>
> I like the idea. One small comment:
>

Thanks. I prefer it as single patch but it can't be applied to any tree.
Any suggestions on handling this patch to fix the warning in -next ?

>> +int of_machine_get_model_name(const char **model)
>> +{
>> +	int error;
>> +	struct device_node *root;
>> +
>> +	root = of_find_node_by_path("/");
>> +	if (!root)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>
> The global of_root variable points ot this already, and is defined
> in the same file, so I think we can just skip the lookup.
>

Ah right, will fix it.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep