linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 8/8] serial: exar: Add support for IOT2040 device

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: <CAHp75VcKZumhYqc9SW_JM+8ecAEfi7mWbr6=d7kFVeEPA1_LkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 18 May 2017 13:17:19 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sudip Mukherjee <sudip.mukherjee@...ethink.co.uk>,
        Sascha Weisenberger <sascha.weisenberger@...mens.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] serial: exar: Add support for IOT2040 device

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
> On 2017-05-13 15:54, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Sat, May 13, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com> wrote:
>>> This implements the setup of RS232 and the switch-over to RS485 or RS422
>>> for the Siemens IOT2040. That uses an EXAR XR17V352 with external logic
>>> to switch between the different modes. The external logic is controlled
>>> via MPIO pins of the EXAR controller.
>>>
>>> Only pin 10 can be exported as GPIO on the IOT2040. It is connected to
>>> an LED.
>>>
>>> As the XR17V352 used on the IOT2040 is not equipped with an external
>>> EEPROM, it cannot present itself as IOT2040-variant via subvendor/
>>> subdevice IDs. Thus, we have to check via DMI for the target platform.
>>>
>>> Co-developed with Sascha Weisenberger.
>>>
>>
>> Please, refactor that using properly formed DMI structrure and use its
>> callback and driver data facilities/
>
> Could you point to a specific example? The callback of the dmi_system_id
> structure is not designed to handle device initializations like this one
> - not to speak of having those two different initialization points here.

Sure.

drivers/platform/x86/dell-laptop.c:

static const struct dmi_system_id dell_quirks[] __initconst = {
        {
                .callback = dmi_matched,
                .ident = "Dell Vostro V130",
                .matches = {
                        DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Dell Inc."),
                        DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "Vostro V130"),
                },
                .driver_data = &quirk_dell_vostro_v130,
        },


(just in case, dmi_matched() is part of that module)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko