linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/22] of/platform: add of_platform_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]

Date:	Tue, 28 Jul 2015 15:54:54 +0200
From:	Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
To:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/22] of/platform: add of_platform_device_find()

On 28 July 2015 at 15:39, Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Tomeu Vizoso
> <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com> wrote:
>> From an arbitrary node in the tree, find the enclosing node that
>> corresponds to a platform device, as registered by
>> of_platform_populate().
>>
>> This can be used to find out what device needs to be probed so the
>> dependency described by a given node is made available.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Move the logic for finding a platform device from its firmware node to
>>   of/platform.c as it's not needed for ACPI nodes.
>>
>>  drivers/of/platform.c       | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/linux/of_platform.h |  1 +
>>  2 files changed, 61 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/of/platform.c b/drivers/of/platform.c
>> index ff27494cda8c..89c5cd513027 100644
>> --- a/drivers/of/platform.c
>> +++ b/drivers/of/platform.c
>> @@ -501,6 +501,66 @@ void of_platform_depopulate(struct device *parent)
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_platform_depopulate);
>>
>> +static bool of_is_platform(struct device_node *np)
>> +{
>> +       int count;
>> +
>> +       count = of_property_count_strings(np, "compatible");
>> +
>> +       /* The node has to have a compatible string */
>> +       if (!count)
>> +               return false;
>> +
>> +       /* But it cannot be just a simple memory-mapped bus */
>> +       if (count == 1 && of_match_node(of_default_bus_match_table, np))
>> +               return false;
>> +
>> +       /* But AMBA devices aren't platform devices */
>> +       if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "arm,primecell"))
>> +               return false;
>> +
>> +       /* Node is immediately below root */
>> +       if (!np->parent || !np->parent->parent)
>> +               return true;
>> +
>> +       /* If it's a node in a simple memory-mapped bus */
>> +       if (of_match_node(of_default_bus_match_table, np->parent))
>> +               return true;
>
> This seems really fragile.

I think this finding logic matches the logic for registering platform
devices in of_platform_populate and also what is documented in
Documentation/devicetree/usage-model.txt.

> What about platform devices which are
> children of MFDs but are not "simple-mfd"?

This code should deal fine with those (the boards I tested with do
have them). It probes the mfd master, and that in turn will call
mfd_add_devices causing the target device to be probed.

> Does of_find_device_by_node not work for you?

Well, the dependencies aren't always platform devices, that's why I
need to go up the tree until I find a node that corresponds to a
platform device that I can query and probe.

If I had a way to get, say, a i2c device from its fwnode then I would
just need to make sure that a device's parent is probed before probing
it and everything would be cleaner in the OF case.

> That is probably not the
> most efficient search, but we could fix that. We could add struct
> device ptr to struct device_node and check without searching for
> example.

That would be great, but I thought there was an issue with a OF node
being able to be related to more than one struct device (but I haven't
found this myself yet).

Thanks,

Tomeu

> Rob
> --
> 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/
--
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/