linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] nvmem: Update the OF binding to use a subnode for the cells list

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, 8 Jun 2018 12:59:38 +0200
From:   Alban <albeu@...e.fr>
To:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Cc:     Aban Bedel <albeu@...e.fr>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...ev4u.fr>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] nvmem: Update the OF binding to use a subnode
 for the cells list

On Thu, 7 Jun 2018 18:03:16 +0100
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org> wrote:

> On 07/06/18 17:41, Alban wrote:
> > AFAIU the only thing that we disagree on now is if the nodes
> > representing the cells should be direct children of the provider
> > or in a dedicated subnode. For the MTD case both solution would solve
> > the binding clash. I would really appreciate if the DT people could  
> Am reluctant in changing the nvmem generic bindings for a special case.

Where I think the generic binding is fundamentally flawed, as this
problem will most probably appear again. But do note that my proposal
doesn't require updating the dts using the original binding, both are
still supported. I proposed deprecating the current binding because I
think it is flawed, but we could also "officially" support both style.

> Can you try this with your original subnode proposal:
> just pass the subnode node pointer in np of nvmem_config:
> 
> ------------------------->cut<------------------------------------  
> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> index b05aa8e81303..c9621632bbfb 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> @@ -472,7 +472,11 @@ struct nvmem_device *nvmem_register(const struct 
> nvmem_config *config)
>          nvmem->priv = config->priv;
>          nvmem->reg_read = config->reg_read;
>          nvmem->reg_write = config->reg_write;
> -       nvmem->dev.of_node = config->dev->of_node;
> +
> +       if (config->np)
> +               nvmem->dev.of_node = config->np;
> +       else
> +               nvmem->dev.of_node = config->dev->of_node;
> 
>          if (config->id == -1 && config->name) {
>                  dev_set_name(&nvmem->dev, "%s", config->name);
> diff --git a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
> b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h index f89598bc4e1c..743345ffe2c8
> 100644 --- a/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
> +++ b/include/linux/nvmem-provider.h
> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ typedef int (*nvmem_reg_write_t)(void *priv,
> unsigned int offset,nvmem_device_get(
>    */
>   struct nvmem_config {
>          struct device           *dev;
> +       struct device_node      *np;
>          const char              *name;
>          int                     id;
>          struct module           *owner;
> 
> ------------------------->cut<------------------------------------  

That should work just fine to allow next to any kind of binding.
I'll do a new patch using this approach for the code side and leaving
the generic binding as it is.

Alban

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped