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]
Message-ID: <20081017212942.GA1919@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru>
Date:	Sat, 18 Oct 2008 01:29:42 +0400
From:	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
To:	David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
	"Steven A. Falco" <sfalco@...ris.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, i2c@...sensors.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...abs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] gpiolib: implement dev_gpiochip_{add,remove} calls

On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 01:24:42PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> On Thursday 16 October 2008, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Platforms can define their own __dev_ versions to glue gpio_chips with the
> > + * architecture-specific code.
> > + */
> > +#ifndef __dev_gpiochip_add
> > +#define __dev_gpiochip_add __dev_gpiochip_add
> > +static inline int __dev_gpiochip_add(struct device *dev,
> > +                                    struct gpio_chip *chip)
> > +{
> > +       chip->dev = dev;
> > +       return gpiochip_add(chip);
> > +}
> > +#endif /* __dev_gpiochip_add */
> 
> This is pretty ugly, especially the implication that *EVERY* gpio_chip
> provider needs modification to use these calls.

Anyway most of them need some modifications to work with OF...

> Surely it would be a lot simpler to just add platform-specific hooks
> to gpiochip_{add,remove}(), [...]

We have printk and dev_printk. kzalloc and devm_kzalloc (though I
aware that devm_ are different than just dev_).  So I thought that
dev_gpiochip_* would be logical order of things...

If you don't like it, I can readily implement hooks for
gpiochip_{add,remove}().


Thanks for the comments,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ