linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] eeprom: Add a simple EEPROM framework

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: <54EF3434.6040003@linaro.org>
Date:	Thu, 26 Feb 2015 14:56:52 +0000
From:	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
To:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
CC:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"linux-api@...r.kernel.org" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] eeprom: Add a simple EEPROM framework



On 26/02/15 13:21, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 09:16:27AM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>> I think we are making simple eeprom framework too smart which will
>> break in future.
>>
>> IMHO, Anything on top of eeprom interface that interprets the data should
>> not go into the eeprom framework itself, it can either live some parsers/SOC
>> specific drivers/interfaces.
>
> True, but that doesn't mean that this parser support can't be built
> within the framework itself.
I was more of thinking parsers/interpreters as a layer on top of this 
framework. Allowing the simplest users direct access to framework. Also 
just eeprom_read() apis would not cater for all the parsers and I think 
it would be very difficult to come up with abstracted consumer apis for 
all the parsers which could be iterator or link-lists parsers or 
something very different.

>
>> As Stephen pointed out earlier lets start with something like this, which
>> would provide a better abstraction to the discussed use cases like
>> serial-number and packed data in eeprom.
>>
>>     qfprom@...0000 {
>>        reg = <0x1000000 0x1000>;
>>        ranges = <0 0x1000000 0x1000>;
>>        compatible = "qcom,qfprom-msm8960"
>>
>>        pvs-data: pvs-data@40 {
>>              compatible = "qcom,pvs-a";
>>              reg = <0x40 0x20>,
>>        };
>>
>>         tsens-data: tmdata@10 {
>>              reg = <0x10 40>;
>>        };
>>
>>        serial-number: serial@50 {
>>              compatible = "qcom,serial-msm8960";
>>              reg = <0x50 4>, <0x60 4>;
>>        };
>>
>>     };
>
> And I'm sorry, but I still don't get why the compatibles are needed
> here.
This is an optional property, only purpose of this would be to serve as 
parser/soc-specific identifier.

>
>> and then on the consumer side:
>>
>> 	device {
>> 		eeproms = <&serial-number>;
>> 		eeprom-names = "soc-rev-id";
>> 	};
>> 	
>> driver side:
>>
>> 	eeprom_get_cell()
>> 	eeprom_read();
>
> Looks good otherwise.
thanks
--srini
>
> Maxime
>
--
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/