linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] spmi: Add MSM PMIC Arbiter SPMI controller

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, 16 Aug 2013 11:52:56 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Josh Cartwright <joshc@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	Sagar Dharia <sdharia@...eaurora.org>,
	Gilad Avidov <gavidov@...eaurora.org>,
	Michael Bohan <mbohan@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] spmi: Add MSM PMIC Arbiter SPMI controller

On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 01:37:07PM -0700, Josh Cartwright wrote:
> +struct spmi_pmic_arb_dev {
> +	struct spmi_controller	controller;
> +	struct device		*dev;
> +	struct device		*slave;

This is problematic.

Why do you have the driver "own" the controller?  What is dev for,
there's already a struct device within the controller.  Same for slave,
what is it?

You have 3 struct devices here, which one controls the lifecycle of the
object (hint, I know the answer, but I think it's wrong...)

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/