linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] serial: 8250_pci: use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE

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: <001001ceef13$7fa3ee70$7eebcb50$%han@samsung.com>
Date:	Mon, 02 Dec 2013 13:03:46 +0900
From:	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>
To:	'Guenter Roeck' <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	'Joe Perches' <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	'Greg Kroah-Hartman' <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	'Bjorn Helgaas' <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	'Andrew Morton' <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	'Andy Whitcroft' <apw@...onical.com>,
	linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, 'Jingoo Han' <jg1.han@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] serial: 8250_pci: use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro

On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:56 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 12/01/2013 07:50 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > On Monday, December 02, 2013 12:46 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> >> On 12/01/2013 04:07 PM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>> On Friday, November 29, 2013 10:34 AM, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 3:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, 2013-11-27 at 21:53 -0800, 'Greg Kroah-Hartman' wrote:
> >>>>>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 09:40:13PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 14:29 +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 1:08 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:55:35AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Yeah, and it's a horrid macro that deserves to be removed, please don't
> >>>>>>>>> use it in more places.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Actually, if you could just remove it, that would be best, sorry, I'm
> >>>>>>>>> not going to take these patches.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> (+cc Joe Perches, Andrew Morton, Andy Whitcroft)
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Hi Joe Perches,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Would you fix checkpatch.pl about DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> >>>>>>>> Currently, checkpatch.pl guides to use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>>>> as below.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id
> >>>>>>>>     #331: FILE: drivers/usb/host/ehci-pci.c:331:
> >>>>>>>>     +static const struct pci_device_id pci_ids [] = { {
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> However, Greg Kroah-Hartman mentioned that DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>>>> shouldn't be used anymore.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So, would you change checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> >>>>>>>> struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> For example,
> >>>>>>>>     WARNING: Use struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The documentation doesn't agree with Greg.
> >>>>> []
> >>>>>> I say just remove it, I should have done that years ago when I was the
> >>>>>> PCI maintainer, just never got around to it.  No other bus has something
> >>>>>> like this for their device ids, why should PCI be "special"?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Anyone else have an opinion?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't care one way or another, but please, one way
> >>>>> not two.
> >>>>
> >>
> >> Same here.
> >>
> >>>> (+cc Bjorn Helgaas, linux-pci)
> >>>>
> >>>> Then, how about the following steps?
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. Fix ./Documentation/PCI/pci.txt as below.
> >>>>      (Jingoo Han)
> >>>>      The ID table is an array of struct pci_device_id entries ending with an
> >>>>      -all-zero entry; use of the macro DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE is the preferred
> >>>>      -method of declaring the table.  Each entry consists of:
> >>>>      +all-zero entry; Each entry consists of:
> >>>>
> >>>> 2. Fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl in order to guide to use
> >>>>       struct pci_device_id instead of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE.
> >>>>       (Joe Perches)
> >>>
> >>> If all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs are replaced with 'const struct pci_device_id'
> >>> and these patches are merged through 'driver-core.git', it will be not
> >>> necessary to fix ./scripts/checkpatch.pl.
> >>>
> >> Why not ?
> >
> > I will replace all DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLEs with 'const struct pci_device_id',
> > and remove the definition of DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro.
> >
> > --- a/include/linux/pci.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/pci.h
> > @@ -631,16 +631,6 @@ struct pci_driver {
> >   #define        to_pci_driver(drv) container_of(drv, struct pci_driver, driver)
> >
> >   /**
> > - * DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE - macro used to describe a pci device table
> > - * @_table: device table name
> > - *
> > - * This macro is used to create a struct pci_device_id array (a device table)
> > - * in a generic manner.
> > - */
> > -#define DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(_table) \
> > -       const struct pci_device_id _table[]
> > -
> > -/**
> >
> > In this case, there is no DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE usage
> > in the kernel. If someone uses DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro,
> > it will make  build error.
> >
> 
> And that will make the checkpatch warning go away ?
> That seems to be very unlikely.

OK, I will ask Joe Perches to remove the following checkpatch
warning.

    WARNING: Use DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE for struct pci_device_id

Best regards,
Jingoo Han

--
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/