linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ACPI: Don't create a platform

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:   Thu, 23 Mar 2017 00:41:02 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ACPI: Don't create a platform_device for IOAPIC/IOxAPIC

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de> wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 06:42:39PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> On Wednesday, March 22, 2017 06:33:25 PM Joerg Roedel wrote:
>> > From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
>> >
>> > No platform-device is required for IO(x)APICs, so don't even
>> > create them.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
>>
>> If we do this, I'd prefer not to do [2/3], because we'll introduce code that
>> will be essentially dead then.
>
> In this case the code in acpi_bus_attach() adding platform_devices is also
> dead. Could it be removed then?

It is not dead.

Platform devices are actually created by it, but they never go away.

Thanks,
Rafael