linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] i2c-mux: add common core data for every mux instance

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:	Thu, 24 Mar 2016 19:59:37 +0100
From:	Peter Rosin <peda@...ator.liu.se>
To:	Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir_zapolskiy@...tor.com>
CC:	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Peter Korsgaard <peter.korsgaard@...co.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
	Antti Palosaari <crope@....fi>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
	Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Adriana Reus <adriana.reus@...el.com>,
	Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>,
	Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>,
	Olli Salonen <olli.salonen@....fi>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] i2c-mux: add common core data for every mux instance

Hi Vladimir,

On 2016-03-24 15:24, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> On 24.03.2016 13:05, Peter Rosin wrote:
>> On 2016-03-24 10:50, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
>>> On 05.01.2016 17:57, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>>> @@ -196,21 +195,21 @@ static int i2c_arbitrator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>  		dev_err(dev, "Cannot parse i2c-parent\n");
>>>>  		return -EINVAL;
>>>>  	}
>>>> -	arb->parent = of_get_i2c_adapter_by_node(parent_np);
>>>> +	muxc->parent = of_find_i2c_adapter_by_node(parent_np);
>>>
>>> why do you prefer here to use "unlocked" version of API?
>>>
>>> Foe example would it be safe/possible to unload an I2C bus device driver
>>> module or unbind I2C device itself in runtime?
>>
>> I think you ask why I change from of_get_i2c_... to of_find_i2c_..., and that
>> change was not intentional. It was the result of a bad merge during an early
>> rebase.
>>
>> Does that cover it?
>>
> 
> Yep, thank you for clarification, please account this in v3.

Oh , v3 is old news, v4 was sent out some weeks ago, and there is a v5
on a github branch. This bad rebase was fixed in v4.

> I'll try to find some time to review the whole changeset carefully,
> in fact I briefly reviewed it two months ago, but I didn't find
> anything obviously wrong that time.

Please put that on hold until I have rebased ontop of v4.6-rc1 and
changed a couple of other things. I'd hate for you to waste your
time on outdated patches.

Cheers,
Peter