linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 16/16] platform/x86: dell-wmi: Convert to the WMI bus infrastructure

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:   Sat, 27 May 2017 11:40:52 -0700
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <mario_limonciello@...l.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/16] platform/x86: dell-wmi: Convert to the WMI bus infrastructure

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> On May 27, 2017 9:04:38 AM PDT, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>>On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
>>wrote:
>>> On Saturday 27 May 2017 07:31:30 Darren Hart wrote:
>>>> -     dell_wmi_input_dev->name = "Dell WMI hotkeys";
>>>> -     dell_wmi_input_dev->phys = "wmi/input0";
>>>> -     dell_wmi_input_dev->id.bustype = BUS_HOST;
>>>> +     priv->input_dev->name = "Dell WMI hotkeys";
>>>> +     priv->input_dev->id.bustype = BUS_HOST;
>>>
>>> Is not there BUS_WMI, or something like that? (Just asking)
>>>
>>
>>Jiri and/or Dmitry, what is bustype for, anyway?
>
> The bus type could be used to help further  identifying device if it used same vendor/product for spi and i2c, for example, but there are not many if them. I'm not sure if anyone actually makes decisions based on it, but it is part of abi now.
>
>>I suppose we could add BUS_PLATFORM.
>
> What would be the difference from BUS_HOST?
>

If BUS_HOST means that the device is part of the host as opposed to
being plugged in, then it seems entirely reasonable.