linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] remoteproc: core: Add rproc OF look-up 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]

Date:	Tue, 10 May 2016 11:48:06 -0700
From:	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel@...inux.com, maxime.coquelin@...com, ohad@...ery.com,
	linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
	Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] remoteproc: core: Add rproc OF look-up functions

On Tue 10 May 07:16 PDT 2016, Lee Jones wrote:

> On Fri, 06 May 2016, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> 
> > On Thu 05 May 06:29 PDT 2016, Lee Jones wrote:
> > 
> > > - of_rproc_byindex(): look-up and obtain a reference to a rproc
> > >   		      using the DT phandle "rprocs" and a index.
> > > 
> > > - of_rproc_byname():  lookup and obtain a reference to a rproc
> > >   		      using the DT phandle "rprocs" and "rproc-names".
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@...com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> > > ---
> > 
> > I like the idea of having these helpers, but we already have
> > rproc_get_by_phandle() so these helpers should be built upon that rather
> > than adding the additional list.
> 
> Since this is a framework consideration, don't you think it would be
> better to standardise the phandle name?  This is common practice when
> coding at a subsystem level.  Some in use examples include; "clocks",
> "power-domains", "mboxes", "dmas", "phys", "resets", "gpios", etc.
> 
> Considering the aforementioned examples, I figured "rprocs" would be
> suitable.
> 

To summarize our chat for the record and others.


I'm definitely in favour of this and think "rprocs" and "rproc-names"
sounds good.  My comment was only regarding the duplicated
implementation.

Regards,
Bjorn