linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

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: <CAHp75Vf5=E37Ccrc2zMo8xOWmA-A_FZL7d57q7Rxk07M-V5mhg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:59:58 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] eeprom: at24: Add OF device ID table

On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
<javier@....samsung.com> wrote:
> The driver doesn't have a struct of_device_id table but supported devices
> are registered via Device Trees. This is working on the assumption that a
> I2C device registered via OF will always match a legacy I2C device ID and
> that the MODALIAS reported will always be of the form i2c:<device>.
>
> But this could change in the future so the correct approach is to have an
> OF device ID table if the devices are registered via OF.

I'm bot sure this patch does something useful right now. Can we
survive without it? I think we may.

>  drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c | 189 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 188 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

It's a huge! It will increase not only driver code base but memory
footprint for almost no benefit.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko