linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/11] iommu: Add iommu_device_set

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: <20170210161122.GB18474@suse.de>
Date:   Fri, 10 Feb 2017 17:11:22 +0100
From:   Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
To:     Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc:     Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] iommu: Add iommu_device_set_fwnode() interface

On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 04:03:07PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Yeah, on reflection explicit initialisation is certainly easier to read
> than a bunch of arguments handled implicitly by register(), but then
> from that angle, even more clear would be to simply have the drivers
> write the relevant struct members directly - I'd be quite happy with
> that, and we then don't have to add another setter to iommu.h for every
> new struct member (and risk it looking like Java code...)

Yeah, that was my first approach. But there is the Intel VT-d anomaly,
where a part of the driver can be built-in (dmar.c) with
CONFIG_IOMMU_API=N. In this case 'struct iommu_device' is empty, and
trying to access the members directly doesn't compile anymore.

I have to look if this anomaly could be removed, then it is probably the
best to set the struct members directly without wrapper functions.


	Joerg