[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAOMqctR3MDijTSr0=7tiHK+exygrGLbLQQ=GF_KAH-Y2xvb1Nw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2016 04:12:10 +0200
From: Michal Suchanek <hramrach@...il.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Adrien Schildknecht <adrien+dev@...ischi.me>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] spi: spidev: fix the check for spidev in dt
On 26 June 2016 at 03:13, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 05:41:19PM -0000, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>
>> The check is supposed to warn about spidev specified directly in
>> devicetree as compatible. This just does not work. I have a devicetree
>> with no compatible whatsoever and hacked my kernel so I can manually
>> bind spidev. This still triggers.
>
> Well, a DT device won't instantiate without a compatible string...
> could you please explain exactly what makes you say this won't work?
That's because the whitelist concept for this check is completely broken.
Without any patches whatsoever I should be able to specify m25p80
binding in the DT, let the kernel create the device, unbind the
driver, and bind spidev.
Then I have the jedec,spi-nor compatible which is not on the whitelist.
>
>> Also I have no idea how this could have build with ! CONFIG_OF since the
>> id table which the code checks is not compiled then.
>
> of_match_device() compiles out when !OF.
>
>> +static const struct of_device_id spidev_check[] = {
>> + { .compatible = "spidev" },
>> + {}
>> +};
>
> The indentation here is completely non-standard.
>
>> - if (spi->dev.of_node && !of_match_device(spidev_dt_ids, &spi->dev)) {
>> + if (spi->dev.of_node && of_match_device(spidev_check, &spi->dev)) {
>
> I think what you intend to say in the commit message is that you want to
> change from a whitelist to a blacklist since that is what the code says,
> but like I say we also need an explanation of the logic behind such a
> change.
It's because the check kernel log message says it's a blacklist and
it's incorrectly implemented as a whitelist.
The change is to correct that.
Thanks
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists