linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] serial: exar: Add support for IOT2040 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:   Thu, 18 May 2017 13:56:15 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>,
        Sascha Weisenberger <sascha.weisenberger@...mens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] serial: exar: Add support for IOT2040 device

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
> On 2017-05-18 12:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
>>> On 2017-05-13 15:54, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

>>>> Please, refactor that using properly formed DMI structrure and use its
>>>> callback and driver data facilities/
>>>
>>> Could you point to a specific example? The callback of the dmi_system_id
>>> structure is not designed to handle device initializations like this one
>>> - not to speak of having those two different initialization points here.
>>
>> Sure.
>>
>> drivers/platform/x86/dell-laptop.c:
>>
>> static const struct dmi_system_id dell_quirks[] __initconst = {
>>         {
>>                 .callback = dmi_matched,
>>                 .ident = "Dell Vostro V130",
>>                 .matches = {
>>                         DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
>>                         DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Vostro V130"),
>>                 },
>>                 .driver_data = &quirk_dell_vostro_v130,
>>         },
>>
>>
>> (just in case, dmi_matched() is part of that module)
>>
>
> OK, but that would basically replace the two lines for matching against
> the DMI values with the structure above. We would still need the
> existing hooks at the two points where we have them right now.

Right.

> Doesn't
> look to me as if the code would become clearer or better separated or
> easier extensible (the latter being hard anyway without knowing any
> potential third special case).

stmmac, that you chose as an example, should go that way in the first
place because it was my though behind which is on-to-one to yours
above.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko