linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/3] ASoC: da7219: Convert driver to use generic device/fwnode functions

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: <2E89032DDAA8B9408CB92943514A0337D463C6A3@SW-EX-MBX01.diasemi.com>
Date:	Mon, 9 May 2016 12:05:56 +0000
From:	"Opensource [Adam Thomson]" <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	"Opensource [Adam Thomson]" <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>
CC:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
	"alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>,
	Sathyanarayana Nujella <sathyanarayana.nujella@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] ASoC: da7219: Convert driver to use generic
 device/fwnode functions

On May 06, 2016, 17:06, Mark Brown wrote:

> No, not really - your DT is fairly unusual in how it's done and the lack
> of ACPI helpers is not a good sign on that side.  The _DSD things are
> really only supposed to work for simple properties on devices.

It's unusual in that there's a child node ("da7219_aad") of the device node, to
encapsulate AAD specific information. The properties inside though are data only
and simple. Actually, as I read it this is exactly the kind of thing that the
'Hierarchical Data Extension UUID For _DSD' is for.

> > The intention was to just match against DT or ACPI and nothing else, so that
> > didn't feel generic enough to be pushed into the fwnode framework. However
> > I will take another look.
> 
> That's currently the entire set of things that fwnode supports so...

I believe there's the FWNODE_PDATA type as well so 3 things, although I assume
that this is to be used longer term instead of the old fashioned platform
data mechanism, for built-in properties. Right now though I don't see much
actual usage of this.