| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4693466.kRRNMahPuB@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2015 04:52:29 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
Cc: "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Linux PWM List <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH v2 02/12] device: property: find dependencies of a firmware node
On Friday, July 10, 2015 03:14:38 PM Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> On 2 July 2015 at 02:02, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> > On Wednesday, July 01, 2015 11:40:57 AM Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> >> Adds API that allows callers to find out what other firmware nodes a
> >> node depends on.
> >>
> >> Implementors of bindings documentation can register callbacks that
> >> return the dependencies of a node.
> >>
> >> Dependency information can be used to change the order in which devices
> >> are probed, or to print a warning when a device node is going to be
> >> probed without all its dependencies fulfilled.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
> >
> > I'd like to see a description of the new API in English in the changelog.
>
> Agreed.
>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> Changes in v2:
> >> - Allow bindings implementations register a function instead of using
> >> class callbacks, as not only subsystems implement firmware bindings.
> >>
> >> drivers/base/property.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> include/linux/fwnode.h | 5 +++
> >> include/linux/property.h | 12 +++++++
> >> 3 files changed, 108 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/base/property.c b/drivers/base/property.c
> >> index 8ead1ba..9d38ede 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/base/property.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/base/property.c
> >> @@ -19,7 +19,13 @@
> >> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> >> #include <linux/property.h>
> >>
> >
> > Please add a comment describing this structure. In particular, what it is
> > supposed to be used for and how it is supposed to be used.
>
> Ok.
>
> >> +struct dependency_parser {
> >> + struct list_head parser;
> >
> > I'd rather call this "list_node" or something like that.
>
> Ok.
>
> >> + void (*func)(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, struct list_head *deps);
> >> +};
> >> +
> >> static bool fwnode_match_enable = false;
> >> +static LIST_HEAD(dependency_parsers);
> >>
> >> /**
> >> * device_add_property_set - Add a collection of properties to a device object.
> >> @@ -553,6 +559,27 @@ bool device_dma_is_coherent(struct device *dev)
> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_dma_is_coherent);
> >>
> >> /**
> >> + * fwnode_add_dependency - add firmware node to the passed dependency list
> >> + * @fwnode: Firmware node to add to dependency list
> >> + * @list: Dependency list to add the fwnode to
> >> + */
> >> +void fwnode_add_dependency(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> >> + struct list_head *list)
> >> +{
> >> + struct fwnode_dependency *dep;
> >> +
> >> + dep = kzalloc(sizeof(*dep), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> + if (!dep)
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dep->dependency);
> >> + dep->fwnode = fwnode;
> >> +
> >> + list_add_tail(&dep->dependency, list);
> >> +}
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_add_dependency);
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> * fwnode_get_parent - return the parent node of a device node
> >> * @fwnode: Device node to find the parent node of
> >> */
> >> @@ -600,6 +627,70 @@ bool fwnode_is_compatible(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, const char *compatible)
> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_is_compatible);
> >>
> >> /**
> >> + * fwnode_add_dependency_parser - register dependency parser
> >> + * @func: Function that will be called to find out dependencies of a node
> >> + *
> >> + * Registers a callback that will be called when collecting the dependencies
> >> + * of a firmware node. The callback should inspect the properties of the node
> >> + * and call fwnode_add_dependency() for each dependency it recognizes, from
> >> + * the bindings documentation.
> >> + */
> >> +void fwnode_add_dependency_parser(
> >> + void (*func)(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, struct list_head *deps))
> >> +{
> >> + struct dependency_parser *parser;
> >> +
> >> + parser = kzalloc(sizeof(*parser), GFP_KERNEL);
> >> + if (!parser)
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&parser->parser);
> >> + parser->func = func;
> >> +
> >> + list_add_tail(&parser->parser, &dependency_parsers);
> >
> > We're modifying a global list here. Any locking needed? RCU? Whatever?
>
> Oops.
>
> >> +}
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_add_dependency_parser);
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * fwnode_remove_dependency_parser - unregister dependency parser
> >> + * @func: Function that was to be called to find out dependencies of a node
> >> + */
> >> +void fwnode_remove_dependency_parser(
> >> + void (*func)(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode, struct list_head *deps))
> >> +{
> >> + struct dependency_parser *parser, *tmp;
> >> +
> >> + list_for_each_entry_safe(parser, tmp, &dependency_parsers, parser) {
> >> + if (parser->func == func) {
> >> + list_del(&parser->parser);
> >> + kfree(parser);
> >> + return;
> >> + }
> >> + }
> >> +}
> >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_remove_dependency_parser);
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * fwnode_get_dependencies - find out what dependencies a firmware node has
> >> + * @fwnode: firmware node to find its dependencies
> >> + * @deps: list of struct fwnode_dependency in which dependencies will be placed
> >> + */
> >> +void fwnode_get_dependencies(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> >> + struct list_head *deps)
> >> +{
> >> + struct dependency_parser *parser;
> >> + struct fwnode_handle *child;
> >> +
> >> + list_for_each_entry(parser, &dependency_parsers, parser)
> >> + parser->func(fwnode, deps);
> >> +
> >> + /* Some device nodes will have dependencies in non-device sub-nodes */
> >> + fwnode_for_each_child_node(fwnode, child)
> >> + if (!fwnode_property_present(child, "compatible"))
> >
> > This is a blatant OF-ism. We need to think about a generic way to express that.
>
> My impression from reading the existing usage of fwnode in gpiolib and
> the examples in the link below was that we were going to share the
> bindings between DT and ACPI. Doesn't that extend to the meaning of
> the compatible property?
>
> http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-device-properties-UUID.pdf
Not entirely.
An ACPI device object without the "compatible" property may still represent a valid
device (and usually does), so it is not enough to check whether or not the "compatible"
property is present for that in general.
Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists