linux-kernel - Re: [V3 PATCH 3/5] device property: Introduces device_dma_is

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, 08 May 2015 22:49:09 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	"santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com" <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>
Cc:	Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
	lenb@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
	thomas.lendacky@....com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	davem@...emloft.net, arnd@...db.de, msalter@...hat.com,
	hanjun.guo@...aro.org, al.stone@...aro.org,
	grant.likely@...aro.org, leo.duran@....com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [V3 PATCH 3/5] device property: Introduces device_dma_is_coherent()

On Thursday, May 07, 2015 09:12:00 PM santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com wrote:
> On 5/7/15 5:37 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> > Currently, device drivers, which support both OF and ACPI,
> > need to call two separate APIs, of_dma_is_coherent() and
> > acpi_dma_is_coherent()) to determine device coherency attribute.
> >
> > This patch simplifies this process by introducing a new device
> > property API, device_dma_is_coherent(), which calls the appropriate
> > interface based on the booting architecture.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/base/property.c  | 12 ++++++++++++
> >   include/linux/property.h |  2 ++
> >   2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/property.c b/drivers/base/property.c
> > index 1d0b116..8123c6e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/property.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/property.c
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >   #include <linux/export.h>
> >   #include <linux/kernel.h>
> >   #include <linux/of.h>
> > +#include <linux/of_address.h>
> >   #include <linux/property.h>
> >
> >   /**
> > @@ -519,3 +520,14 @@ unsigned int device_get_child_node_count(struct device *dev)
> >   	return count;
> >   }
> >   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_get_child_node_count);
> > +
> > +bool device_dma_is_coherent(struct device *dev)
> > +{
> > +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node)
> 
> Do you really need that IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) ?
> In other words, dev->of_node should be null for !CONFIG_OF

Yes, but IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) causes the check to be optimized away by the
compiler if CONFIG_OF is not enabled.


-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/