linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/6] [media] ov9650: add device tree support

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, 27 Jun 2017 08:36:42 +0300
From:   Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>
To:     "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
Cc:     Hugues Fruchet <hugues.fruchet@...com>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <sylvester.nawrocki@...il.com>,
        Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski@....de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Hans Verkuil <hverkuil@...all.nl>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>,
        Yannick Fertre <yannick.fertre@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/6] [media] ov9650: add device tree support

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 07:46:34PM +0200, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > Am 26.06.2017 um 18:31 schrieb Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>:
> > 
> > Hi Hugues,
> > 
> > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 05:05:38PM +0200, Hugues Fruchet wrote:
> >> @@ -1545,15 +1577,22 @@ static int ov965x_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> >> }
> >> 
> >> static const struct i2c_device_id ov965x_id[] = {
> >> -	{ "OV9650", 0 },
> >> -	{ "OV9652", 0 },
> >> +	{ "OV9650", 0x9650 },
> >> +	{ "OV9652", 0x9652 },
> > 
> > This change does not appear to match with the patch description nor it the
> > information is used. How about not changing it, unless there's a reason to?
> > The same for the data field of the of_device_id array below.
> 
> I think it could/should be used to check if the camera chip that is found
> by reading the product-id and version registers does match what the device
> tree expects and abort probing on a mismatch.

Makes sense. But it should be a separate patch, shouldn't it?

You could also put the id to the ops struct, and choose the ops struct that
way. Entirely up to you.

-- 
Sakari Ailus
e-mail: sakari.ailus@....fi	XMPP: sailus@...iisi.org.uk