linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] Drop platform sysfs 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, 18 Aug 2009 02:54:45 -0700
From:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To:	Alan Jenkins <sourcejedi.lkml@...glemail.com>
Cc:	Mario Limonciello <mario_limonciello@...l.com>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cezary.jackiewicz@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Drop platform sysfs support

Hi Alan,

> > With rfkill support being added, the platform support is no longer
> > necessary.  Standard rfkill interfaces can be used to administer the box
> > now.
> > --
> > Mario Limonciello
> > *Dell | Linux Engineering*
> > mario_limonciello@...l.com
> >
> 
> -static struct platform_device *compal_device;
> 
> I don't think this is the right way to go.  I don't object to removing
> the sysfs attributes, but the platform device can still be useful as a
> parent device to the rfkill and backlight devices.  (See my earlier
> comment on the use of rfkill_allocate()).
> 
> In practice I suspect it makes no difference that the rfkill and
> backlight devices are exported as virtual devices with no physical
> parent.  I just don't think it's "right" :-).

it actually does make a difference for hardware detection. We wanna have
them hanging of the compal platform device.

Regards

Marcel


--
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/