linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] drivers/misc: Add Intel System ID driver

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: <CAK8P3a3n57ST2G8vXR8tzMrhLb7Fut6xUw3aNQEi-wi=hum8LQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:05:43 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Loh, Tien Hock" <tien.hock.loh@...el.com>
Cc:     "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Nguyen, Dinh" <dinh.nguyen@...el.com>,
        "thloh85@...il.com" <thloh85@...il.com>,
        "Gerlach, Matthew" <matthew.gerlach@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] drivers/misc: Add Intel System ID driver

On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Loh, Tien Hock <tien.hock.loh@...el.com> wrote:
> On Rab, 2017-02-15 at 20:51 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 6:17 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 07:09:41PM +0800, thloh wrote:
>> > >
>> > > From: "Loh, Tien Hock" <tien.hock.loh@...el.com>
>> > >
>> > > This patch is to add Altera System ID driver.
>> > > User can obtain the system ID and timestamp of the system by
>> > > reading the sysfs entry.
>> > >
>> > > Usage:
>> > > cat /sys/bus/platform/devices/[addr].sysid/sysid/id
>> > > cat /sys/bus/platform/devices/[addr].sysid/sysid/timestamp
>> > If you add new sysfs attributes, you need to also add a
>> > Documentation/ABI/ description as well.
>>
>> Maybe we could pretend that this is for a SoC and use the standard
>> soc_device
>> attributes as well as moving the driver into drivers/soc/?> Sorry for the late reply.
>
> This driver can currently be used by ARM and Nios II, so moving it into
> drivers/soc might not be the best idea.

Why not? drivers/soc/ was specifically introduced for stuff that is used on
some SoC but across more than one architecture (otherwise it would be
in arch/foo/). This seems to fit perfectly.

     Arnd