linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 01/11] mfd: add pruss mfd 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:	Fri, 13 May 2011 16:25:56 +0530
From:	"Subhasish Ghosh" <subhasish@...tralsolutions.com>
To:	"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>,
	"Mark Brown" <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc:	"Nori, Sekhar" <nsekhar@...com>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com>,
	<sachi@...tralsolutions.com>,
	"Samuel Ortiz" <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	"open list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Watkins, Melissa" <m-watkins@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/11] mfd: add pruss mfd driver.

>>
>> Ok, thanks for the clarification.
>> Instead of passing the device name, will it be ok to pass the mfd_id.
>> The benefit will be that I can use the ID directly as an array
>> index for the mfd_cell entries.
>
> I think a device name would be clearer here, especially in order
> to avoid conflicts when the list gets extended in different ways
> depending on which kernel runs.
>
> We had a little discussion at the Linaro Developer Summit about your
> driver and mfd drivers in general. There was a general feeling among
> some people (including me) that by the point you dynamically create
> the subdevices, MFD is probably not the right abstraction any more,
> as it does not provide any service that you need.
>
> Instead, maybe you can simply call platform_device_register
> at that stage to create the children and not use MFD at all.
>
> Samuel, can you comment on this as well? Do you still see pruss
> as an MFD driver when the uses are completely dynamic and determined
> by the firmware loaded into it?
>

Hi Arnd,

But in that case, where do I fit my driver.
It's a microcontroller inside of a processor, guess that's unique for Linux.
Will a misc device be a better choice.

In that case I can remove the MFD cell from the board_file and add an array
of platform_device for the UART & CAN.

Regarding device register, I will have to implement something similar to
mfd_add_devices and mark the dev->parent.

Did I miss something or will that be fine.



 

--
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/