linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/12] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties 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]

Message-Id: <20141104154950.3175EC423D0@trevor.secretlab.ca>
Date:	Tue, 04 Nov 2014 15:49:50 +0000
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Darren Hart <darren.hart@...el.com>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Bryan Wu <cooloney@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/12] Add ACPI _DSD and unified device properties
 support

On Sat, 25 Oct 2014 00:10:20 +0200
, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
 wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 21, 2014 11:08:59 PM Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> > 
> > This is version 6 of the unified device properties interface patchset.
> > 
> > The original cover letter from Mika is here:
> > 
> > http://marc.info/?l=devicetree&m=141087052200600&w=4
> > 
> > and my cover letters for previous iterations are at:
> > 
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=141212903816560&w=4
> > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=141354745011569&w=4
> > 
> > There are a few changes with respect to v5 and the affected patches are
> > [02-03/12] and [09-12/12].  The remaining ones have not been modified.
> > 
> > Most importantly, requesting the first element of a list (package) property
> > from _DSD is now equivalent to accessing a single-value property of the
> > same type, so device_property_read_u8(dev, pname, val) will now be equivalent
> > to device_property_read_u8_array(dev, pname, val, 1), for example.
> > Consequently, this _DSD definition:
> > 
> > Name (_DSD, Package () {
> >     ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"),
> >     Package () {
> >         Package () {"blah", "A string"},
> >     }
> > })
> > 
> > can be used instead of
> > 
> > Name (_DSD, Package () {
> >     ToUUID("daffd814-6eba-4d8c-8a91-bc9bbf4aa301"),
> >     Package () {
> >         Package () {"blah", Package () {"A string"}},
> >     }
> > })
> > 
> > and the code will be able to retrieve the property value from the both of
> > them just fine.
> > 
> > This means, among other things, that accessors for single-value properties
> > can be implemented in terms of the analogous "array" property accessors
> > which allows the code size to be reduced somewhat.
> > 
> > Patches [02/12] and [09/12] have been modified to achieve that and patch
> > [03/12] have been modified accordingly for the "compatible" property in
> > _DSD to behave in an analogous way.  Additionally, the bodies of the
> > numerical property accessors in patches [02/12] and [09/12] are now
> > generated using macros (string property accessors have slightly different
> > rules and are simply open coded for that reason).
> > 
> > Patch [10/12] has been modified to drop function arguments that happened to
> > have the same values for both of the current users of those functions and
> > patches [11-12/12] have been modified to take that change into account.  If
> > the code in question needs to be made more complex in the future, there
> > should not be any problems with that.
> > 
> > Due to the nature of the changes I have retained all ACKs except for the
> > Grant's Reviewed-by on patch [03/12] (if that had been Acked-by, I would have
> > retained it too, but that didn't feel appropriate for the "reviewed by" thing
> > to me).  If any of you think that the ACKs are not applicable any more, please
> > let me know and I'll drop them.
> > 
> > Finally, many thanks to Mika for testing the series on MinnowBoard 1 and
> > MinnowBoard Max.  In case anybody else would like to test it, it is available
> > from the device-properties branch of the linux-pm.git tree:
> > 
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git device-properties
> > 
> > Thanks!
> 
> Crickets ...
> 
> OK, so I'm taking the lack of comments as the lack of objections and I'm already
> getting merge conflicts for this series.  Moreover, we already have done some
> work on top of it.
> 
> So, if there still are no comments by Sunday evening, I'll add this series to
> my linux-next branch with 3.19-rc1 as the target.

Aside from the comments I've made elsewhere, you can add my acked by for the whole series.

Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>

g.
--
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/