linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] s390/cio: introduce driver

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, 24 Jun 2019 09:17:40 +0200
From:   Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To:     Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/cio: introduce driver_override on the css bus

On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 18:19:36 +0200 (CEST)
Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > Sometimes, we want to control which of the matching drivers
> > binds to a subchannel device (e.g. for subchannels we want to
> > handle via vfio-ccw).
> > 
> > For pci devices, a mechanism to do so has been introduced in
> > 782a985d7af2 ("PCI: Introduce new device binding path using
> > pci_dev.driver_override"). It makes sense to introduce the
> > driver_override attribute for subchannel devices as well, so
> > that we can easily extend the 'driverctl' tool (which makes
> > use of the driver_override attribute for pci).
> > 
> > Note that unlike pci we still require a driver override to
> > match the subchannel type; matching more than one subchannel
> > type is probably not useful anyway.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>  
> 
> Reviewed-by: Sebastian Ott <sebott@...ux.ibm.com>
> 
> Should I take that via our git tree or do you have other patches depending 
> on this one?
> 

No, this patch is stand-alone; everything else is happening in user
space, so taking it via your tree would be great. Thanks!